The United Sovereign Nations
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
The United Sovereign Nations


You are not connected. Please login or register

A Debate on Observerships

+4
Daniel
Kurt
Carl
Jon
8 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

What should we do with the Observer Membership level?

A Debate on Observerships Pollle1014%A Debate on Observerships Pollri10 14% [ 1 ]
A Debate on Observerships Pollle1029%A Debate on Observerships Pollri10 29% [ 2 ]
A Debate on Observerships Pollle1057%A Debate on Observerships Pollri10 57% [ 4 ]
A Debate on Observerships Pollle100%A Debate on Observerships Pollri10 0% [ 0 ]
Total Votes : 7

Poll closed

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

1A Debate on Observerships Empty A Debate on Observerships Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:04 pm

Jon

Jon
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)

Okay, so I think it's about time we talk about this.

First I'm going to review my thoughts on Observership, then I think it would be very beneficial if others chime in and we have a solid discussion.

I think that as it is now, offering membership at the Observer level is hurting USNW. The reason for this, I believe, is that other unions do not offer a similar membership. Therefore, people on the fence about what union to join and people who want to be in more than one union chose to become full-fledged members at another union while becoming an observer here. Just look around, this is an obvious trend, and a very troubling one. Although some people can properly contribute as observers, and most claim they can, it is fairly evident to me that people that do this gradually become more active at their "primary" union and less active here. I think USNW deserves better than to be everyone's "secondary" union. Therefore, I think we need to consider some action to address this. I think scaling back observership, requiring more from observers, prohibiting observers from unions that do not themselves offer observership, or simply doing away with observership altogether are potential solutions. I won't reveal what I prefer at this time but I think all of them have pros and cons.

So, now I'd like to know what you think. Do you think, as I do, that there is a problem with Observerships? If so, what do you think should be done to address this problem?



Last edited by Jon on Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:25 am; edited 1 time in total

2A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:15 pm

Carl

Carl

I think requiring more for observers is the best thing. I mean, as I checked over the guidelines for application, coming into observerships are easier and that it only requires a couple of pictures and a brief history to enter. I think by requiring more from the observers is a good idea Razz

I think banning observer that do not themselves offer observership is pretty much a bad idea because all of our observers, with the exception of Naik, are from AIN, which bans Observerships. It would remove the majority of observers in the USNW which will be pretty bad for the union if implemented. However, this option could still work.

http://oktimes.canadian-forum.com

3A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:26 pm

Jon

Jon
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)

AIN is a lot of the problem here, many people are choosing to go become a member there and just become observers here. To me, this is NOT good for USNW.

In addition, one of the reasons their attempts to recruit from within our ranks are having success is that people think they can go to AIN and just downgrade to observer here.

4A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:29 pm

Carl

Carl

That's what happened to everyone pretty much, like ying... and why is ying stilla full member here?

http://oktimes.canadian-forum.com

5A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:34 pm

Jon

Jon
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)

ArrowHead wrote:That's what happened to everyone pretty much, like ying... and why is ying stilla full member here?

I fixed Ying's membership status.

Maybe we should consider not allowing observers from AIN?

6A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:39 pm

Kurt

Kurt
Admin (Shayden)
Admin (Shayden)

I could support that. Or maybe require Observers to only be in USNW?

7A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:40 pm

Daniel

Daniel

I'm somewhat open to that possibility...needs more discussion, though. Razz

8A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:46 pm

Carl

Carl

Yeah, I think a ban on unions that does not have observerships would be a really good idea

Razz

http://oktimes.canadian-forum.com

9A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:02 am

Carl

Carl

Ummmm, it might be better if we continue to arguments. This just kind of died down.

http://oktimes.canadian-forum.com

10A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:54 am

Kurt

Kurt
Admin (Shayden)
Admin (Shayden)

I'm not really sure what to debate though...

11A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:43 pm

Daniel

Daniel

I don't see what's to debate either...it seems everyone who posted here more or less agrees Razz

12A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:31 pm

Jon

Jon
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)

Yeah, this debate lasted like 5 minutes with us all agreeing Razz

Does anyone else have anything to input?

13A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:43 pm

Scotch Moen

Scotch Moen
Member (Folland)
Member (Folland)

Dispose of the membership altogether.

Full and Ambassadorial is all that's needed. If Observership is hurting us so, and is such a lowly, taken advantage of membership, get rid of it. This union doesn't have many memebers anyway, why need three levels? To make this union more appetizing is to make it simple to comprehend. All we really need, are full fledged members, and almost there members who are learning the ropes. Why need something else that's less than that?

http://www.dehyan.deviantart.com

14A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:48 pm

Carl

Carl

^^ Yep, that was we all agreed upon Razz

I think what would happen however, is that the long time observer (note the singularity) will lose his membership and thus, his roleplay Razz

http://oktimes.canadian-forum.com

15A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:00 pm

Scotch Moen

Scotch Moen
Member (Folland)
Member (Folland)

From what I see is that people are agreeing on something else which still leaves Observership open as a possible membership. I'm moving to have to disposed of entirely.

http://www.dehyan.deviantart.com

16A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:05 pm

Jon

Jon
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)

I think we should also, as Mike hinted at a bit, look at combining Ambassadorial and Full Membership and just call it Membership. There's no real need for the hierarchy.

17A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:50 pm

Jack

Jack
Member (Acadia & Valessia)
Member (Acadia & Valessia)

Now, with the activity dying down, I can see that there is no need for full memberships and ambassadorial memberships to be separate. The observer thing does seem to be becoming a problem too. Neutral

18A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Mon Jan 14, 2013 10:41 pm

Scotch Moen

Scotch Moen
Member (Folland)
Member (Folland)

Am I having trouble being clear here? lol What I am getting at is REMOVING Observerships entirely, so it's just Full and Ambassador to choose from when applying.

http://www.dehyan.deviantart.com

19A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:16 am

Jon

Jon
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)

MikeVM wrote:Am I having trouble being clear here? lol What I am getting at is REMOVING Observerships entirely, so it's just Full and Ambassador to choose from when applying.

I got what you meant Razz

But you said just full-fledged members. It took that as hinting at combining Ambassadorial and Full Membership, which I think is a good idea.

20A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:19 am

Carl

Carl

LOL fail Razz

Back to topic please... I think I start to lean more on Mike's argument. After looking at the advantages of the observer program, there are just way too many advantages for the players seeking USNW as their Secondary Union after those in both AIN.

http://oktimes.canadian-forum.com

21A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:21 am

Jon

Jon
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)

I'm just wondering what the general opinion is on combining Ambassadorial and Full Membership.

I'm also adding a poll to this thread with a couple options so we can really see what people want. Razz

22A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:43 am

Daniel

Daniel

I'm all for keeping Observatory membership, just not from any (major?) unions that don't offer the status themselves. One of the original intentions of Observatory was for those who weren't yet sure if this union was for them, after all. Razz

23A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:56 am

Sauberbmw

Sauberbmw

I think we should remove observership and keep the two other levels of membership. The Ambassador and Full. The Former would allow people to get a taste of the union. If they are active and they like it then there should be something like an automatic upgrade to full maybe? instead of reapplying for a full membership. Though, getting rid of it and have membership as one might be better.

24A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:25 pm

Jack

Jack
Member (Acadia & Valessia)
Member (Acadia & Valessia)

I think maybe a time limit for observers? Maybe you can stay an observer for x amount of months, then you must apply for membership.

25A Debate on Observerships Empty Re: A Debate on Observerships Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:16 pm

Carl

Carl

idts Jack, that is not what observer is supposed to do Razz

I'm with the abandon ship on this one. Time to get rid of "observerNW" Razz

http://oktimes.canadian-forum.com

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum