A Debate on Observerships

Looks like we are mostly in agreeance

We do have 5 observers. 2 are actually active. I don't want to kick out Forth or OtherWill.

Will is a member of AIN, and would be stripped of his membership if any reforms to observership are passed. Shubham is a member of CINL, which I believe offers observer memberships.

Oh I see. So we can pressure AIN into possibly re-opening observer memberships. But knowing AIN somewhat, they will be stubborn and boycott the USNW even more.

I think this may really backfire, so we should be careful.

Just up their memberships here automatically. We don't need to boot anyone. And really if the people over at AIN want to be politically prissy they can kiss my virtual cyberbum. Unions need to be for fun.

Eh, they have this 'One Union' Policy so they won't budge, no matter how hard you try. Some AIN members are trained "Joo Dees" so they will tend to stick to the policy of "One Union, No Observers"

I kind of not wanting to lose Shub's observership, I mean he has contributed many stuff in the USNW community, I'm not gonna lie

We should not be forced to abide by others ridiculous policies so we can keep our friend. If they want to be that way, so be it. I'll still up his membership to Full and not make a fuss about it.

I like that. Who needs AIN policies!

LOL

So is it settled? Observership has been eliminated?

This is an unofficial debate. A proposal will have to be launched to do anything.

I don't want to get rid of observerships completely, but as a compromise, I would say yes to only allowing observerships from unions that allow observerships.

I agree with Jack.

It seems to me that a lot of this is pointed at the AIN. Why do we have to follow in their footsteps and make everything about them or around them? I say we do what WE (the USNW) want to do and what is best for US. I could see doing away with Observerships. Keep the Full and Ambassadorial memberships separate. If a member is going to go away for a second then they can be put on-leave, until they return.

I think it's because people tend to choose AIN and then apply to USNW as an observer... They'll choose USNW as the secondary union, which is really unfair for us. Also, in the past few months I have seen a couple of USNW members move to AIN and apply as observers here. Clearly that's absolutely unfair because they are choosing to go to union while participate in events here.

Jack wrote:Oh I see. So we can pressure AIN into possibly re-opening observer memberships. But knowing AIN somewhat, they will be stubborn and boycott the USNW even more.

I think this may really backfire, so we should be careful.

Putting pressure on AIN is not the point of this. The point is what Carl just said. If both unions allow observers then it is two-way, both unions can get the person either as a member or an observer. But another union doesn't offer observership and we do it's one way, we always get the person as an observer and the other union always gets them as a member.

I could care less if AIN opens up and offers observership, but I do care that the current situation is not at all beneficial to USNW.

Well hopefully AIN does begin to offer observerships so this will all work out. I say go ahead and put up a proposal. The one where the observer's union must offer observership.

I don't think AIN will budge anythime sooner. Remember One Union? It's still is there.