My arguments are in the other thread. I will not go in a circle restating them here, restating counter arguments again here, etc. I am giving you the general idea my arguments in the other thread get at. I made my points clear there. I will not restate them again and again.
Then I misunderstood your intention of what your idea was.
This is just false. I will support a proposal that will accomplish the goals I set for my proposal.
There is no compromise here since this is fundamentally at odds with my proposal, despite addressing the problem of Delegate awards.
“There is no compromise here […] despite addressing the problem of Delegate awards.”
I think what you mean is that there definitely is compromise here, but you just want more. Which is fine. But when you say one thing instead of another - such as your earlier hyperbole - just to crap on my ideas, rather than to try solving anything, it doesn’t help anyone. This is why it seems to me you’re not even considering other possibilities. Whether or not it’s “just false”, it’s the way you come off when you’re belligerent about different ideas and willfully unhelpful.
Compromise is always “fundamentally at odds” with the two things it’s trying to compromise between. Notably, this proposal is also at odds with the current system.
I’d like to work to address your issues. I was hoping to not have to read through twenty thousand textwalls in order to get the gist of them, but ig I was foolish to think that.
This is actually proving really annoying to do, and kinda unwieldy. How would y’all feel about separate resolutions for different “generations” of the OGO? Idk. This is a headscratcher.
I am belligerent about awards reform. I do not deny that. You and Arbiter Zukchiva both helped develop the initial idea of the Honors Wall Act. Why you both suddenly shifted and put up stiff resistance to it after the work went into creating the Act is bewildering and extremely frustrating. You and Arbiter Zukchiva both had opportunity to oppose this when it was still a concept being developed.
Where did your sudden shifts of opinion come from? Why did you not tell me before I worked out the details and presented the Act? Did I misunderstand what your intention was in helping create the concept in the Ministry of Outreach? Tell me so I can know.
I think Aiv made it clear in his first post why he is making a new proposal.
I support this proposal. I wasnt able to read the Hall of Heros bill at first, and now that ive read it over a few times, this is a better proposal and keeps our unique identity in our awards. If you believe the awards are overcrowded, you can ask to take the OGO away from people. Just be prelared with good arguments as to why some people shouldnt have an OGO.
My general reasoning for opposition has remained consistent. When I became aware of the project, I brought up various concerns I’ve since voiced here - mainly and primarily, the lack of minor awards. Specifically, I brought up that idea twice - once as a personal preference but oh well kinda thing, another as a more fleshed out idea I proposed. In other words, since day 1 I was concerned about the removal of more minor awards for a single government award. I also stated here that I’d support your proposal if it was fixed to include minor awards.
The main thing that’s changed since this was being developed is that I decided to commit to my opposition once you posted your proposal publically, rather than handwaving my feelings away (and thus, not really opposing the proposal during its development). That is, of course, unfair to you - and for that, I apologize. I get the frustration you’re feeling with having done work only for people to start attacking it when they could’ve done so way earlier, having been through it in the summer. It’s a tendency I have to hide my true thoughts until the last chance to speak up - something I’ve realized recently. I’ll start working on it.
I think people deserve recognition for participating and helping us succeed in those events.
(or idk if that’s actually the case anymore but it definitely used to be a big thing)
that was really only Marr and Lib & me and Lib, afaik
but ig
Executive awards are once per person. Why not the latter? Similarly to what I added for the OGO, I envisioned a system where updates were made when exceptional service was shown, but I also kinda expect awards to be given only when people are “done”, yk? Kinda like SC Commends. I’d like to foster that culture as much as I can through structure.
but couldn’t an OGO serve as that capstone? It’d also add to its unique structure
Why have ribbons set by the Delegate? Because I hate the idea of images in a law. It’s an aesthetic nightmare. I also played very much with the idea of it being “the first design instituted by a Delegate is the permanent design” but I didn’t want to specifically burden the next Delegate with designing all of them, yk?
which i get but then it kinda goes contrary to standardization.
I made six suggestions in that thread that I can find. Long conversations went by when I didn’t read a single thing, mainly because I was too busy at all the times I remembered to start getting involved in an extensive process. But since you brought it up, here’s how I helped:
I suggested an award for CTE’d nations (rejected)
I refined that to suggest an award for nations who have “concluded their service” (rejected)
I opposed making the top award too exclusive as to exclude people like Serge (kinda went nowhere)
I further suggested an oldies-specific award (ignored)
I agreed that we have been too liberal with OGOs (not that we should remove OGOs)
I agreed that granting awards en masse at the end of a term is bad (not solved with either proposal here)
I never supported your proposal. I never knew much about it. I supported the general idea of reform, and tried to offer my input, but it was largely rejected in the few cases I had the time and energy to actually offer it. There has been no shift in opinion. And I certainly had no hand in creating the concept.
Sure, I had the opportunity to oppose it in the Executive thread, and I am sorry that it took until it was sent to the Magisterium for me to take the time to understand the full breadth of it, but just because something was developed within the Executive doesn’t mean that the Magisterium, or really any citizen, should just rubber stamp it.
N Day and Z Day are extremely common and extremely popular events. If we give out awards do everyone in the server, then they’re meaningless. Not to mention, the awards system will get overcomplicated and oversaturated if every active person in TEP adds three ribbons to their signature every year ad infinitum. Operations, on the other hand, are much more (a) impactful on the region’s image/strength, (b) rare and exciting occasions, and (c) limited in personnel.
OGO does apply that logic as well but the point here is to solve the argument that all the awards are too overcrowded. This makes them all exclusive. And if the minor awards are still pretty exclusive, then yet again that draws people away from the OGO and into categories better suited for acknowledging their specific talents/contributions without diminishing those talents/contributions. I suppose, in line with Honors Wall, we could do tiers to the minor awards, but I still really don’t like that idea, because it lacks style and liveliness.
For ribbons, how about “The first ribbon to be announced via Executive Order by the Delegate shall be the permanent ribbon for its associated Executive Honor. If no ribbon exists, the Honor may still be awarded.”
If you both, Grand Vizier Mangegneithe and Arbiter Zukchiva, had raised your objections as strongly in the Ministry of Outreach, the work that went into the proposal would not have been wasted. That is what really confused and frustrated me. I am not asking for a rubber stamp.
As of now, I am tabling the proposal. I don’t have the drive to continue it.
Whatever proposal you both develop, I hope it succeeds where the last system failed.
yeah i get it and all i can say is im sorry. i’ll try to be more honest with my thoughts to prevent future scenarios, should we find ourselves in similar situations again in the future >.<
N Day and Z Day are extremely common and extremely popular events. If we give out awards do everyone in the server, then they’re meaningless. Not to mention, the awards system will get overcomplicated and oversaturated if every active person in TEP adds three ribbons to their signature every year ad infinitum. Operations, on the other hand, are much more (a) impactful on the region’s image/strength, (b) rare and exciting occasions, and (c) limited in personnel.
Awards still serve as great memorablia. I think the concerns of award complication are also pretty overblown, seeing as most people who get an award never put it in their sig.
I don’t think we need to have explicit awards for them, but I do think we should allow Delegates to grant such awards if they feel like it. Especially since it’s been a pretty non-harmful tradition for years (at least, when Delegates feel like giving them out), and I highly doubt they could have any affect on the exclusivity for awards that are never really awarded for those events in the first place
For ribbons, how about “The first ribbon to be announced via Executive Order by the Delegate shall be the permanent ribbon for its associated Executive Honor. If no ribbon exists, the Honor may still be awarded.”
IG, although this seems like a useless walkaround when a straightforward solution exists that you dislike simply for aesthetic reasons.
I don’t think it’s wasted. For one, without those efforts, we’d not have considered reform, we wouldn’t have known the issues to address, and we wouldn’t have gotten the opinions of others.
For the record, discussion on this is still active, but is primarily concentrated in a discord group chat. Let me or Vussul know if you’d like to be added.