Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'vetting'.
Found 2 results
-
@StratoCrewzr and @Sir_Belial have put a considerable amount of time into preparing a comprehensive document with regards to the vetting system mentioned this past week on the forums and discussed at length in a handful of impromptu Teamspeak meetings. @VoA and I have been present for some of this and we like where it's going. Fleet Command has actually reviewed it and will be following up on this to see what they can do with it at the organization level, I believe. I've moved a copy of the document into the Official Documents folder (click here). This document is still a work in progress as there are a handful of small changes to be made after the admin review. If they make any changes I'll update the copy as well (the master file is hidden). Attached to this post will be a poll - do not answer it until you've read the entire document, please. That being said, if there is anything you don't like about the document, note the section with your poll answer and go into specifics in a comment on this thread. Ideally, I'd like to see comments being made regardless of whether they're positive or negative. We want to make sure we're balancing the hardcore aspect of the Unit and Organization with fun and reality so that it reflects the standards we want to hold ourselves to. Edit: If you have a problem with any given part of the document, please explain it in a comment. The poll alone is not enough information for us to make changes on. -
@StratoCrewzr Brought up a great point in the PM thread, copying that post here as this was his brainchild: "Hello Fellow Blood Moon Brethren and Happy New year. I would like to start off the new year with a proposal that more often than not, would be unpleasant to have to deal with or address. I believe if we address this now and establish a form of Unit Policy, we can prevent or lessen conflict and hurt feelings later on down the road. We have two issues that have come up enough times in group discussion to warrant us addressing how best to deal with it before it becomes a problem for both Blood Moon as a Unit and for it's members as individuals. Everyone should take pride in the fact that we have made Blood Moon into a very successful squadron/unit within Imperium. We are often pointed to as a good example of how a Unit in good standing within Imperium should be. We have been at maximum capacity for some time now and as we have inactive members removed from the roster, we've seen no issue with those looking to take their place among our ranks. I suspect as time goes on, we will see even more interest for members showing the desire to join our Unit. We have been fortunate so far and have a tremendously talented group of enthusiastic individuals who make up Blood Moon. This is why I propose that we have a group discussion now, rather than later, to address how we vet and remove those individuals, from Blood Moon, that may not be as good of a fit as we've been fortunate enough to experience to this point. We have TWO points of discussion that are equal in their importance. Establishing policy now will greatly reduce the likelihood for discord in the future if we have a policy already in place. 1) As interest grows for members to join Blood Moon, how should we properly vet the applicant to where present members feel as though they've participated and had a say in the process? 2) How should we properly remove individuals from our Unit Roster from either inactivity or simply proving to not be a good fit within the group? Additionally, we should keep a running seniority for those who are removed should they later choose to rejoin as vacancy becomes available. - We should discuss if the vetting process should be an open period for 2 months or so in order to provide several opportunities for us to get to know the applicant and also enough time for a current member to speak up with pro's and con's on the new applicant. Not all of our members can make every meeting and having a page of applicants available to each member allows us to read the postings from the applicant in various forums and to make one or two meetings where we can talk and interview the applicant. - Not any more pleasant is the discussion on how to democratically and properly remove any individual who may not be working out with the group. We also need to differentiate those who have violated and just not played well with others from those who have just been inactive for a long period of time and may be welcome to return at a later date. Thank you for taking the time to read this. I know we all want to avoid conflict when we can and I believe by addressing how we handle these difficult situations now, can greatly prevent conflict and trouble further down the road. With no written policy or ability to vet and vote by each of us, we unfortunately expose ourselves to conflicts that could simply have been avoided. If nothing else we've hopefully reduced them. Please share your thoughts. Thanks. " Couldn't get a direct quote in here for some reason, if someone can tell me how to do that I'll fix this post. ANYWHO - the primary objective of this meeting would be to establish a vetting process for screening applicants and dismissing members who, for whatever reason, the Unit feels to be an unfit member. Whether these end up being the same process or two different ones is up to everyone that stops by to offer their opinions. I hope we can see a larger than usual turnout for this particular meeting since it pertains to the longevity of the unit as a group of friends as opposed to an ingame entity.
