Training Threads.

[Jaqen H'ghar]

Okay I've heard in the last two weeks more bitching about training threads than I can shake a stick at. Regarding training threads, we all know there is no point if you're a qualified RPer capable of showing that in a profile of going through acolyte/padawan/whatever-the-republic/hutt variant of training is. If for instance I told Bac that because he never completed his acolyte training and leapfrogged ahead so he needs to go back and do it, he would laugh at me.


Now I'm assuming that we were put in charge of our respective factions because we were voted in based on our respective ability to lead said factions, or perceived ability at the very least. It is with that notion that I would like to bring up a solution to training threads, and lack of activity in training threads due to people taking on more than one padawan/whatever at a time. It's rather simple and used to be okay until last month for whatever reason when it was taken away completely (although I didn't realize it was taken away from the faction leaders) which is to say;

The choice of who becomes a crusader/knight and who becomes an acolyte/padawan.

I think that choice should lie with the faction leaders, as it is our job after all to well, lead the faction. Any fallout from our choices of who to promote without training, which should and would be used sparingly, would fall on us, and all the admins have to do is say "take it up with (insert faction leaders name here)."

Alright, now that my ramble is out of the way, discussion time.

 

[Ru the Boatswain]

I kind of agree with this, but at the same time I have a slightly different idea. Maybe there needs to be a ratio of top, mid, and low ranking.

In the end, people seem to have a problem with not being able to be promoted quickly. A lot of people leave, some people complain about this. Honestly, I don't think SWRP's goal is to retain most of the members who sign up.

 

[Ser Gregor]

If you haven't previously held a higher rank in the faction, you must start out at the lowest rank and go through training. The staff has decided that's the case, to keep from any perceived favouritism.

 

[Jaqen H'ghar]

Yes, I understand the reasoning behind it, however shouldn't it be up to the faction leaders to figure out how they want to do promotions, otherwise it negates the point of having faction leaders if the staff are just going to over ride what we wish to do with the faction.

 

[Ser Gregor]

It's up to the faction leaders to come up with the training regiment, but if the staff feel that they aren't stringent enough/they're too stringent we'll change them.

The staff have always had the authority to override the faction leaders, we just don't do it often.

 

[Ols]

Yes, I understand the reasoning behind it, however shouldn't it be up to the faction leaders to figure out how they want to do promotions, otherwise it negates the point of having faction leaders if the staff are just going to over ride what we wish to do with the faction.

Yeah, promotions overall are up to you, but the rule states that nobody may skip training if they've never gone through it in that faction before. That's the rule and that goes for every member on this forum.

 

[Ru the Boatswain]

For the sake of clarity, must they have passed training this timeline?

 

[Jaqen H'ghar]

Yeah, promotions overall are up to you, but the rule states that nobody may skip training if they've never gone through it in that faction before. That's the rule and that goes for every member on this forum.

Yes, which is why I was petitioning to change the rules.

 

[Ser Gregor]

For the sake of clarity, must they have passed training this timeline?

No.

Yes, which is why I was petitioning to change the rules.

Not going to happen.

 

[Jaqen H'ghar]

No.

Not going to happen.

So what you're saying is that you're asking me to put in the work of a roleplay administrator, hell possibly more after the foundations are laid, because we continue to maintain what you have set up after you've washed your hands of it, and yet we can't amend rules that you vote on without our knowledge, or taking into consideration our thoughts on the topic?

Furthermore what ols is telling me in PM is that while I'm supposed to run my faction, I can't handle ooc situations that arise out of it where my work is insulted and the member is out of line, instead I, like a normal member instead of a moderator, am supposed to run to you guys for help and not say anything about it myself?

Just so I've got a clear idea of where I stand.

 

[Ser Gregor]

So what you're saying is that you're asking me to put in the work of a roleplay administrator, hell possibly more after the foundations are laid, because we continue to maintain what you have set up after you've washed your hands of it, and yet we can't amend rules that you vote on without our knowledge, or taking into consideration our thoughts on the topic?

Mandatory training is a site-wide ruling. We do not make rulings on how specific factions are run, but we do have a couple of set rules that aren't going to be changed. Mandatory training for new (to the faction) members is one of them.

Now, how you decide what the details of that training are is up to you, as long as it isn't something like you make one RP then I'm allowed to promote you, 'cuss that would be pretty obviously a circling of the mandatory training rule.

This site is unitary. The faction leaders only have so much power as the administrative team gives them. We won't step on the specifics of how a given faction is run, but we will, if we feel the need, amend how factions as a whole operate.

 

[Jaqen H'ghar]

However you never asked us in the first place about that site wide ruling. Ru is so under staffed in terms of people willing to train others it's not even funny and I'm nearly there myself.

If we promote a noob to knight rank or equivilant under the conditions that he trains X ammount of people in X ammount of days (given that the person they're training stays active) and that noob writes a good profile showing he's capable of literacy how is that a bad idea?

 

[Ser Gregor]

If we promote a noob to knight rank or equivilant under the conditions that he trains X ammount of people in X ammount of days (given that the person they're training stays active) and that noob writes a good profile showing he's capable of literacy how is that a bad idea?

Because it isn't fair to those other people who aren't being allowed to start out at Knight level.

 

[Jaqen H'ghar]

Because it isn't fair to those other people who aren't being allowed to start out at Knight level.

How is it not fair, they're not starting out at knight level and keeping it forever, they still have to do the work and they're being given the chance due to writing an exceptionally good profile. Furthermore like I said, if anyone complains you can just send them to us, as it would be our choice and we can talk to them so that way you don't have to deal with it, because I know how much you hate dealing with new people Nexus.

 

[Ru the Boatswain]

newb is probably the correct term. I am having trouble finding people to train people.

Actually part of the 'deal' I have had with people that I've promoted without training- before the new rule- is that they would train one(and probably more) Padawans. It seems to fall through as I've realized I can't make anyone do anything.

For example with Caged, I doubt she'll finish training any of the Padawans she took on. It just bothers me.

 

[Jaqen H'ghar]

It seems to fall through as I've realized I can't make anyone do anything.

Which is exactly the problem with my other complaint about how we can't enforce anything we set up.

 

[Ser Gregor]

Which is exactly the problem with my other complaint about how we can't enforce anything we set up.

What? Yes you can. We've never stopped you from enforcing your rules, but when they clash with the Admins ours supersede yours. That's the way it's always been, and that isn't going to change.

The staff (while I've been a part of it) have never seen a faction leader implement a rule we've had to removed, mainly because faction leaders aren't retarded, and idiotic rules aren't thought up.

This is the first time, in a long time, where we've placed a rule on how the factions are administered. You aren't used to us intervening so you don't like it, but that's the way it's always been.

 

[Jaqen H'ghar]

What? Yes you can. We've never stopped you from enforcing your rules,

Like I said, the member shouldn't have been acting like they were, but at the same time as a respected and senior member here, and as a faction leader, you didn't need to speak to them like you did. And you don't issue warnings. OOC stuff like that is completely spearate from IC stuff. If someone pisses you off OOC, if someone says stuff like that OOC, it doesn't matter, you can't threaten to remove them from your faction.

Sure seems like I can't enforce what I say to me...

For the record, the thread Ols is referencing is this one:

http://www.thestarwarsrp.com/forum/showthread.php?t=23701&page=2

Now we've gone over how I was mistaken about the rule set up with the leapfrogging, so that doesn't need to be touched upon.

 

[Ser Gregor]

As a faction leader you have the right to deal with OOC issues regarding the faction, although threatening to remove him from the faction is a no go. In no way do you have the authority to say to someone they can't join the Dark Jedi because you don't like them.

Ols didn't have a problem with you handling it, but with the way you handled it. IE IC punishment for OOC behaviour.

 

[Jaqen H'ghar]

And I would agree with you if I had another way of dealing with it. However I have no way to actually enforce what I say other than threatening to remove them from the faction, or suspend them, or demote them.