Updates for the 405th in 2015! ALL PLEASE READ!

[Art Andrews]

2015 is set to be an incredible year for the 405th. As many of you know, we stepped into some very big shoes in July of 2014 and it has taken us a while to get our bearings, but we are now ready to move forward with two major projects this year:

1) 405th Club implementation
2) Transition to a modern software platform

While the second task is mostly a behind-the-scenes thing, finally solidifying the club aspect of this community and getting it off the ground will involve all of us!

For those who haven’t looked over it, you can review the basic tenants and layout of the club here:

http://www.405th.com/faq.php?faq=405th_costuming_club

With this in mind, we are making our first Division Staff appointment:

405th member, FANGS has graciously accepted the position of DXO, which means she will serve the community as the acting President and will preside over the staff. For those who may not know FANGS (Angela), she has been a long time member of the 501st and has served in some of the highest offices of that club, which has provided her with a lot of experience in this area. While I will continue to manage the technical aspects of the community (the server/software side), Angela will be replacing me as the primary point of contact for all the day to day issues, questions and concerns.

Both Ashuraa and Masterchief0624 have also stepped up to help us get the club up and running; to get Regiments formalized and get memberships approved which is going to be a tremendous task!

So, what are the next steps? Ashuraa and Masterchief0624 will be reaching out to the current moderators of each of our regiments to get the regiments officially recognized. Once that is done, we will begin the process of electing a Regiment CO. Finally, we will begin taking applications for “Deployed” status membership. It is going to be a little tricky this first time, but we are pretty excited to get it off the ground and to finally get things going!

 

[RobTC]

When it comes right down to it, it's kinda like saying Marines and SPARTANs are useful to the UNSC organisation, but pilots and navigators aren't. If you're going to create artificial delineations, surely they have to be fair to all parties?

Tier C is the public face of the 405th. Tier B is anyone who posts 50 times on the forums, which could theoretically consist entirely of the word "nice". There is no in-between for the large number of non-costuming contributing members- Handlers, Librarians, Didacts, modellers, unfolders, propmakers, Help! thread answerers, etc. Doesn't that seem kinda crazy in a community built on communal resources, greater than the sum of its parts?

In reality, there are probably a larger number of behind-the-scenes infrastructure people than actual costumers. Far more, if you only count Class 3 Legendary Costumers (logically the 405th's "preferred" public face). This, being a community, must follow a populist progressive approach or, like reality, it'll start falling apart as factions start infighting over the trickle-down crumbs.

I just counted six completed costuming builds in my regiment, Southern, in a thread that's six months old. Aren't there any more? How many members does that regiment have? 61, according to the roll call. So... 10% official costumers? Unless that thread suddenly gets an influx of at least 24 completed costume build posts (which, understanding the reality of costume building, seems unlikely, right?) then not even half the members are voting. That's the definition of undemocratic. Replacing an essentially benevolent dictatorship (not inherently a bad thing) with a broken democracy (definitely a bad thing) doesn't seem like a sensible path.

I don't know if or when I have any intention of building a Halo costume, which counts me out of this entire discussion, really. But I'm hoping my BR85 kits land in the hands of at least two or three "Class C"s, which theoretically makes me a "productive active member", any tutorial-ing I do notwithstanding.

 

[Zaff]

I am confused. Unless I am misunderstanding you, the crux of your argument is that acknowledging achievement is inherently unfair and even "Orwellian." I know you don't actually feel that way because you were recently arguing for contributors to the File Archive to be given special ranks and titles.... but based on what you are saying here, that would be unfair to do and EVERYONE should be given a badge below their name and the title of Librarian just because they are here.... Again, I know that surely isn't what you are arguing, but it sure sounds like it.

Everyone who contributes to the community should get a badge, or a title, or some kind of recognition for the work they do regardless of whether that work includes building a costume (which really, what the blue hell does that do FOR the community? Nothing). Watch any movie of your choice and let the credits roll. Guess what you're going to find? The names of maybe 20 actors you saw throughout the film (a few you might recognize, a few you won't), followed by a list of 500-2000 (depending on the film) people you never saw, probably have never even heard of, but with out them that movie would not exist. Welcome to the 405th. I know you're relatively new here (hasn't even been a full year) but your precious costumed clubhouse would not even be a remote possibility without the people who DON'T make suits. Why is that so damn difficult for you to grasp?

There is no doubt, and we aren't making any bones about the fact that this IS a costume-centric club, which is growing out of a costume-centric community (no matter how much some are trying to argue this community isn't about costumes and even isn't about Halo).

Eh? Someone call my name? Let me set the record straight: I never said this community isn't about costumes or that it has nothing to do with Halo. You seem to forget I (like many, many others) Have been around here for quite a while (longer than you, I feel I have to point that out again) I know Halo AND costumes are a big part of what the 405th is. However, I also know (and you seem loathe to accept this) that the 405th is about MORE than just costumes or Halo. You know, it's funny, all this PR bullcrap about "growth" and "evolving" and changing with the times to stride on into the glorious future...by clinging to the same old past. Will Titanfall, Destiny, or any other non-Halo franchise ever replace Halo as the 405th's origin? Imposisble. Will any of these "newcomers" replace Halo in the hearts and minds of members of this community? I think you'l find in some cases it already has. have these and other franchises grown immensely in popularity not just here in the 405th but in the costuming community as a whole? You bet your ass. Is the 405th posed to strike while the iron is hot, to grow and evolve and make itself the home for such builds the way it has been the home for Halo? For some inexplicable reason and in stark contrast to all the progressive PR crap...it seems the answer is "no." "Why should we invest in this upstart "Microsoft" hullabaloo? Our Commodore 64s work just fine!"

When you have a club like that, it IS going to be built to focus on those who have taken the time and effort to create a costume. There is nothing unfair about that approach. Again, an outspoken minority might not like that approach, but not liking something doesn't make it unfair.

Outspoken, yes. Minority? Well aside from you, and now Fangs, I haven't heard ANYONE with anything positive to say about this whole Club business. I HAVE, however, heard a lot of people voicing concerns and getting swept under the rug with no actual answers. Hell the same concerns being voiced now were brought up when the whole club thing first came up and you SAID you were going to put your head together with the other staff members and work out solutions to those concerns. Apparently that brainstorming session wasn't even a drizzle because once again despite all the talk of "change," nothing has changed. Who runs this site, the Obama administration?

The best part is, virtually ANYONE can make a costume and become a part of the club

Oh yes, virtually anyone can be in the club....anyone who has a couple hundred dollars of disposable income just lying around to throw into buying the materials, a few hundred hours of spare time to kill turning those materials into an "approval worthy" costume, oh and several hundred dollars MORE in disposable income at least once a year to not only attend a convention but have their gear shipped there so they can attend in their approved suit to meet the MINIMUM requirements for being a part of the club. But hell, other than that ANYONE can be in the club. Just don't spend any time writing up tutorials, creating and unfolding models, gathering reference materials, or doing absolutely anything else in the community because you need that time to work on your suit because that's all we care about. Seriously, did anyone actually think this crap through before shucking this idea out here?

but even if they don't, they still have the ability to be a part of the community. If they want more, we provide a path for them to do so.

They have the ability to sit right here, and do exactly what I've been doing for the last several days: type words on a screen to people who don't give a rat's rectum because it's no longer OUR community, it's THEIR club. Do you know who went to the conventions before you came around? the 405th community. Do you know who was happy about that? The community. Do you know what each and every one of them got to do? They got to stand up and proudly say "I am part of the 405th." They got to set up tables and booths, and nobody gave a damn if they showed up without their suits. Nobody looked down on them, nobody said "whoa, dude, you can't call yourself 405th. You don't have a suit on. Go on back there and mingle with the other fanboys." If they don't make a suit, and have that suit approved, and wear that approved suit, and take sufficient photographs of themselves in that suit at an event and post a write up announcing they were there, you and your club charter are telling them to park their asses in front of the screen because that's the only way they are ALLOWED to be "part" of the 405th.

Wrong. I'm arguing that a great deal of weight is being placed upon costume-owning members of the forum, to the extent that normal members are being denied what I would deem to be 'basic privileges' - such as being given a voice in their Regiment. I believe I made my point there extremely clear - I am a firm believer in recognising hard work and celebrating success, but I am also not a believer in doing so to the exclusion of the 'have-not' majority.

Precisely. Go through any regiment, heck go through the entire 405th member registry. How many members are there, Art? Now dig through the "completed suits" thread and how many of those belong to members who are still in any way active here? It doesn't take a master mathematician to know there's a staunch disparity between those numbers. Let's be (extremely) generous here and say 25% of the 405th community not only has a suit, but a suit that also meets the required standards for club admittance. You just told 75% of the community to **** off, they don't matter.

This point isn't being contested at all, by anybody. We're all well aware that the main focus of our community is costuming, and nobody here is saying 'don't focus on those that have costumes'. Please, do a little reading again - we're all united behind the goal of costuming and recognising hard work. The point of contest here is how much recognition you give those people before you begin to take basic privileges away from the base community.

Hey, Art, got a suggestion for you. Go out and tell the American people that they can't vote in the next election unless they fit within a specific tax bracket. See how well that goes over. As Chernobyl said before you have this nasty (and quite bluntly, ignorant) habit of oversimplifying this whole "just make a costume" thing. Like it's really that straight forward. Just "make"one. Like it was as easy an accomplishment as exhaling after inhaling, or as easily accessible to everyone as going down to the local convenience store and grabbing a soda. A significantly large number of the members here flat out CAN'T build a suit. They don't have money for the materials, or they lack the physical capability, or they don't have the work space, or they live in an area where they could get thrown out of their home for using resin and other such potentially hazardous chemicals because they live in an apartment, a duplex, or otherwise share the building with other people. And that's just off the top of my head. These people can't make a suit. It's not a matter of choice, it's not as simple as "just make one if you want to be a part of the club," it's not even as simple a thing as "well if you can't' make one, buy one the next time someone sells theirs in the marketplace." If they don't' have $100-300 to spend on the materials to make it themselves they sure as heck don't have $800-1500 to buy someone else's AND have it shipped to them.

I'm pretty sure that saying 'you don't get to engage in the democratic process within your local area because you don't have a costume' would be considered 'unfair' to the majority of the community. I estimate that even the most active Regiment comprises perhaps 35-40% costumed members with 60-65% non-costuming members - you're excluding a large number of people from having a voice within that sub-community simply because of their lack of a costume.

So far the ONLY people who seem to think there's any fairness (or anything positive at all, really) to the Club are Art and Fangs. RobTC, Spacemeat, Chernobyl, Roxy, and myself (and that's just the last few posts) all seem to feel otherwise. Go into the other threads where this subject comes up and you'll find more names added to our side of the debate and still only Art and Fangs trying to contradict it. Doesn't sound like any kind of minority opposes this system. But what do I know? I've just been around longer than both of the prominent staff members (and so has everyone else voicing opposition I might add) and I don't have a costume, so I must not know anything.

See above, yet again. I'm beginning to tire of pointing this out - you're removing what should be a basic right of every Regimental-level member, the right to engage in that Regiment's democratic process, simply because they've not created (or completed) a qualifying build.

Would this be the part where we get to tell Art (and, if I'm not mistaken, Fangs as well) that he's no longer recognized as 405th, let alone a staff member, because he doesn't have a completed build and a thread documenting it? Sorry, the irony there just got to be too much for me to keep in.

In reality, there are probably a larger number of behind-the-scenes infrastructure people than actual costumers. Far more, if you only count Class 3 Legendary Costumers (logically the 405th's "preferred" public face). This, being a community, must follow a populist progressive approach or, like reality, it'll start falling apart as factions start infighting over the trickle-down crumbs.

Back again to what I was saying before about there being hundreds more people involved in the MAKING of something than the select few who get all the publicity, fame, and recognition for it. If not for the fact that I don't want to see it happen, because I know what would happen, I'd offer a challenge: let's see how long the 405th still remains in existence if everyone who made any contribution OTHER than building a suit (which, again, is NOT a contribution to the community) took all of their materials, all of their resources, all of their files, and just left. No more models, no more modelers, no more tutorials, no more help thread lurkers, no more reference resource compilers, absolutely nobody at all except those who build costumes. Spoiler alert: the 405th would be dead. The 405th exists, and continues to exist, because of those members who DON'T put their focus solely on building a suit for themselves and for the sake of showing it off and "representing" the 405th. Without them, without US, Art you wouldn't have your precious club. You'd have a gaggle of people sitting around saying "Does anybody know where I can find templates for this armor piece I need?" "I did, but it's gone now." "Well....****."

I apologize for the language throughout, but I have had it up to here with the...well the flat out ignorance in the way the administration is addressing (or rather, circumventing) the concerns and issues of the community while lying through their damn teeth in saying they're doing all of this with the community in mind. Do you guys work as writers for the WWE? Got about the same storyline going on there for the last several months. "We're going to do what's best for business because we know better than you do what's good for you, so we're going to fire everyone you love, push everyone you can't stand, and tell you all to go screw yourselves and you'd better thank us for it because we know what's best for business." Really, there's not much difference between that, and "we want this club to happen, and we don't care that none of you are comfortable or even agree with any part of what it takes for the club to happen the way we want it to happen, and we know you all pour your heart and soul into this community and as long as you keep your uncostumed carcasses here in the forums everything's hunky-dory, just don't dare show your face anywhere else and claim to be 405th unless you're wearing a completed and approved Halo costume even if you don't particularly care about Halo anymore or only have the budget for a less armor-intensive build or just didn't feel like wearing a Halo suit this time around. You're welcome."

I'm going to keep asking this, because so far NOBODY has answered it: why do we even need the club? Art, Fangs, you're both fairly fresh faces around here. You weren't around before "the dark times" as it's come to be called, you weren't even here really DURING the "dark times. This community has survived, and thrived, without you or your thrice-damned "club" so again I ask WHY the blue hell do we NEED your club?

 

[Chernobyl]

Zaff while I agree with some of your points, I'm going to have to ask you to tone the vitriol back slightly. Presenting your case in such a harsh manner is hardly likely to get people to agree with you, especially if you're making borderline attacks instead of outlining your concerns calmly and rationally. We've made some decent progress over the last few days; let's not spoil all of that by getting heated up and saying things we shouldn't and returning to old arguments. Passion is fine, being argumentative isn't, and your current attitude is more likely to be detrimental to having your concerns heard and acted upon (it's actually more likely to earn you a suspension or ban, which isn't going to help things at all :unsure).

Regardless of that, I'm going to address some of your points in the hopes that we can bring this down to a more civil tone - discussing these issues is good, getting frustrated isn't, so let's try to work out a middle ground here:

Everyone who contributes to the community should get a badge, or a title, or some kind of recognition for the work they do regardless of whether that work includes building a costume

They do. This is why we have Staff members, Librarians, possibly Didacts in the future, Regimental badges, so on and so forth. Please, please, please realise that we do recognise those that go further within the community, even if people don't have a costume. We are not about to snub all of the effort that people have put into building this community in favour of simply celebrating costume builders.

-snip!- non-Halo builds

Please, not this argument again. We've already made it clear that we're more than happy for members to create non-Halo costumes. We even encourage it - however, our primary focus is always going to be Halo. We're not telling non-Halo costumers that they don't matter at all, and they have a place within the 405th - at this point, your argument about non-Halo builds is pointless and circular. You have what you want here, please let's not devolve into this issue again.

Nobody looked down on them, nobody said "whoa, dude, you can't call yourself 405th. You don't have a suit on. Go on back there and mingle with the other fanboys." If they don't make a suit, and have that suit approved, and wear that approved suit, and take sufficient photographs of themselves in that suit at an event and post a write up announcing they were there, you and your club charter are telling them to park their asses in front of the screen because that's the only way they are ALLOWED to be "part" of the 405th.

Actually, nobody ever said that. I'll agree, the amount of involvement non-costuming members are allowed to have needs to be clarified in greater detail, but the 405th isn't just about to throw non-costuming members under the bus at conventions. Non-costuming deployed members will be able to wear 405th shirts, assist at events as handlers and setter-uppers, and act as the 'film crew' you mentioned in an earlier paragraph. The media is likely to focus on the costumed members, certainly, but that doesn't mean that non-costuming members are going to be forgotten. Our input is just as vital to the success of every deployment - without non-costuming members assisting at conventions, we don't go very far at all. Perhaps you'll get a special 'Handler' badge or something, I don't know what's in the works for recognising convention hands - regardless, however we're recognised, be sure in the mind that we will be recognised.

So far the ONLY people who seem to think there's any fairness (or anything positive at all, really) to the Club are Art and Fangs. RobTC, Spacemeat, Chernobyl, Roxy, and myself (and that's just the last few posts) all seem to feel otherwise. Go into the other threads where this subject comes up and you'll find more names added to our side of the debate and still only Art and Fangs trying to contradict it. Doesn't sound like any kind of minority opposes this system.

The people who have issues with the current system aren't ripping the whole thing to shreds - we're recognising what can work, and what might need a little work or clarification to ensure full fairness across the board. Please - instead of simply ranting and railing about how bad you think the current system is, calmly suggest a solution. It might be that some of your suggestions won't be compatible with the new system, and even I realise that it's going to be an impossible task to please absolutely everybody here - please understand how much of a bad position Art Andrews and Fangs are at this point in time - any mis-step goes right back to them, and they're going to receive a lot of unwarranted flak for some of the systems they're putting into place. Instead of simply attacking their methods, understand that they're simply trying to do their job and, rather than making their lives difficult, please work with them and encourage them as we take these first steps into a new chapter for the 405th.

Would this be the part where we get to tell Art (and, if I'm not mistaken, Fangs as well) that he's no longer recognized as 405th, let alone a staff member, because he doesn't have a completed build and a thread documenting it? Sorry, the irony there just got to be too much for me to keep in.

Again, no - the issue here isn't that members without a costume are getting thrown under a bus. We aren't. The issue is simply about how many privileges and rights are being bestowed upon costuming members, at the detriment of the experience of normal, non-costuming members. The bottom line here is that you don't need a costume to contribute - but some articles of the Charter need to be adjusted to ensure that there's still fairness across the board.

To answer your final point: the 'Club' aspect of the 405th deals simply with giving recognition to those who have constructed a costume. Nothing more - the Club is not designed to detriment the experience of the normal community member, with a few noteworthy exceptions that may need to be altered. You can engage quite happily within the community online and offline without having ever created a costume - many, many members do just that already. Please let's not get mired down in this side of the discussion - we simply need to normalise the balance of how much recognition and privilege is given on one side of the scales as opposed to the other. Does that make any sense?

EDIT: I did a little thinking, and I'd like to add an addendum here that should sum up this entire paragraph,

WHAT THE MANTLE IS ABOUT:

• Recognising work put into costumes
• Giving the 405th much-needed structure

WHAT THE MANTLE IS NOT ABOUT:

• Excluding members (for ANY reason)

Some things may need tweaking - let's focus on what we can do rather than attacking people for things that might not look so great right now. We're still a community, we can work together to solve issues.

 

[Cadet]

Zaff, you ask what the point of having a club is. You also talk about how the people with completed suits aren’t active anymore. Do you know why those people aren’t active anymore?
Because once they complete their suits, there is nothing keeping them here. There is no motivation, no incentive to keep people engaged here unless they are actively building a suit. That is exactly what the Club aspect would fix. It would provide a reason for people to stay around and stay active.

I know it is true because it is what happened to me. I made my Mark V, and then, since there was no real interest from anyone else on this forum at the time for making the Classic Mark V, and I had no interest in another style of suit, I drifted away. There was no reason for me to stick around and be active. At the time, I wouldn’t be added to the “Elite Forum” because I wasn’t friends with the right people, and, as I said, there is almost no interest in the original Mark V here, or in the Halo Community at large. So what was the point?

But had the Forums, The Community, had the structure that Art and his new leadership team are looking to put in place, there would have been actually reasons for me to be more active. More roles for me to play to encourage me to stay. Like better communication with local people to help foster a sense of community and give you a reason to get out and help people near you. It’s one thing to type words at a screen to give advice or tips on a build. It’s another to meet in person and to show and teach that way.

Zaff, you also keep talking about how in the past that just anyone could “put up a table at a Con and represent the 405[SUP]th[/SUP].” That is far from the truth. In the past, only the owners/leaders of the 405[SUP]th[/SUP] had a say in the how the logo for the 405[SUP]th[/SUP] was used. The rule used to be that any time you wanted to use the logo, you had to get permission from the Owners/Leadership, and unfortunately, they were often inactive, and would not reply to requests. So, technically, you weren't allowed to make a "405th" banner, signs, flyers, business cards, et cetera with out the express permission of the Owners.

And yes, some people did still have Tables or booths at Cons, but those people either knew and were in contact with the Owners outside of the Forums, or did it of their own volition and did so while violating those existing rules, and they did so to varying degrees of success.

Also, in the past, the 405[SUP]th[/SUP] was pretty much privately owned. The exact words from the previous owner were “No one is the 40[SUP]5th [/SUP]Member. There are just 405[SUP]th[/SUP] Forum users.” Up until now, NO ONE was or could be an “official” 405[SUP]th[/SUP] member, because it just wasn’t even an option. At least now, we are being given the ability, the option, to be able to say that we are in fact 405[SUP]th[/SUP] MEMBERS, not just “Forum Users.”


I will agree that some aspects of this Charter/Mantle and how it pertains to that 405[SUP]th[/SUP] Membership could probably use some work.

For example, the One Event a Year rule. That charter piece works well for the 501[SUP]st[/SUP], because in the 501[SUP]st[/SUP] we have so many more opportunities for events. The local Garrison in my state had well over 150 even requests last year. However, I honestly doubt that due to the “Rated M for Mature” nature of Halo, as opposed to the “PG” nature of Star Wars, we will ever get as many event requests from Children’s Groups and Charities, but I am sure we will get a fair share from groups like Child's Play, just never as many as something with the more Universal appeal of Star Wars. Because we might not have anywhere near as many event opportunities what defines an active member, what constitutes activity, might have to be looked at and tweaked. And Fangs did address that a little when she said the local Regiment leader will/could have the ability to waive the rule and interrupt “Activity” at their discretion. Like, hosting or attending an “Armor Party” where people can work on costumes could count for activity. Helping to set up an event even if you can’t attended could count for activity.

And the 405[SUP]th[/SUP] is different than the 405[SUP]th[/SUP] when it comes to costumed membership. It is easy for us in the 501[SUP]st[/SUP] to have owning a costume as a requirement for Membership because the Star Wars costume world is so well established and costumes and their parts are so much more readily available. (The reasons for that being many and varied when compared to Halo, primarily being that A. Star Wars has been around a lot longer and B. The Original Trilogy costumes were all, well, real costumes to begin with. There were actual physical costumes.) And the Star Wars fan based is skewed to an older crowd than Halo, a more Adult crowd that as such will have more disposable income. So, the membership guidelines might have to be relaxed when it comes to the costumed. Maybe the lowest tier of membership should be a Costume In Progress, as verified by the regiment leadership? As long as you show you are working on a costume, you can qualify for basic membership?

But if the costume should have nothing to do with “Voting” membership qualifications, let me ask this then, what do you guys propose as the standards for “Membership” in the club. When it comes time for elections, how will you determine who gets to vote, and who gets to” run for office?” Base it on Post Count? Length of Time on the Forum? Just Forum Registration?

Can anybody who has had a Forum Account for any amount of time Run and Vote for Regimental leadership? That could get dicey. What's to stop people from making sock puppet accounts and people getting their friends to register accounts just to boost their numbers in an election?

All I will really say is that I have been here since 2007 and adding some layer, any layer, or actual real organization to this place is good and needed.

 

[Chernobyl]

If owning a completed costume should not be the base line for “Voting” membership, what do you guys propose as the standards for “Membership” in the club. When it comes time for elections, how will you determine who gets to vote, and who gets to” run for office?” Base it on Post Count? Length of Time on the Forum? Just Forum Registration?
Can anybody who has had a Forum Account for any amount of time Run and Vote for Regimental leadership?

I'm of the belief that a person's credentials will speak for themselves - if they've taken active roles within that Regiment, they'll have built up a name for themselves and rallied support. In much the same way as an American election has drives before the actual voting takes place, the people who have proven themselves to be worthy leaders will get the votes. Any Jack or Joe can run for office, but without the support of their people behind them, they aren't going to get many votes. That's democracy in action - people with a talent for leading will invariably find themselves in a position to do so.

That's not to say that I believe that literally anybody should be able to run for Regimental command positions - as much as I advocate democracy and the democratic process, I also advocate a limiting process to ensure that only viable candidates hit the pool. I'd suggest that any member who has organised and/or attended Regimental events would be eligible to run for office, and perhaps expand the pool of eligible voters to at least Regimental-level event attendees.

 

[Art Andrews]

I'll start off by saying I've never been in another costuming community or have had any deep looks into them, so I'm unsure of what the culture is like in other communities, but what I can speak about is my experience here at the 405th. Yes, we should be and are focused on the costumes, but something that should be recognized is that the person in the costume is only a part of the whole cosplay ecosystem. Yes, I have built several Spartan outfits, but I would never have been able to do it without pep files modeled and unfolded by people on this site or from reading tutorials and watching videos of how to assemble armor. And god knows how many times I've had pieces fall off during a con and was saved by someone carrying a repair kit. And I feel indebted to those that have taken the time to herd us Spartans in our stifling helmets through con crowds and kept coordination with staff that needed us during events and cons. I feel very strongly that these people who contribute the club don't need to be with a costume, and while costumers can be acknowledged for their work and achievement, there are other fields of work that contribute to those costumes you see up front. Therefore, I think we need to consider alternate avenues for members to attain tier C or some equivalent status that confers voting and office rights. If you want to shine a spotlight on costumers and give them accolades for their work, it's your prerogative and I'm not opposed to that. However, I feel that there should be some level that costumers,modelers,handlers.etc. can attain where we stand shoulder to shoulder have equal privileges, responsibilities, and input to the club.

@FANGS and I were going over the Mantle last night and noticed something that may be causing a bit of the confusion that we are seeing here. It has been 6 months or more since we worked out the details on it and in reading over the Membership section, it seems to me we are missing a section. We reference it in a couple of places but the actual section seems to be missing. We are going to go over it and once we have determined where the issue is, we will come back and discuss it further. Until then, I am not going to debate it any more because well... that missing part might answer many questions.

I know you don't want to change the mantle as of right now, but can I ask what the proposed timeline at this point is? From my understanding, we've already submitted applications to make the regiments "official", at which point I'll assume we're going to need elections for regimental and battalion offices. As you've noted, we have no officially "deployed" members, so for this first election, what's the criteria for those eligible to vote and hold office? After that, we would we be open to evolving the mantle? I do believe there is an election scheduled for January 2016.

The current timeline is this... and as I mentioned before... this first time WILL be unique and somewhat out of order, but what we are trying to do is get the regiments up to speed as soon as possible.

1. Finish all the regiment applications ASAP.
2. Hold elections before May. This is going to be the tricky part because 1) No one will actually yet qualify to be a CO and 2) no one will yet qualify to vote... but we will figure it out.
3. Once COs are elected, have the COs work with those in their regiment to get members deployed before August.
4. Let things ride and reassess in December to see what worked and what didn't, what needs to change and what can stay the same BEFORE we hold the first standardized election.

Basically this year gives us two things; 1) a chance to get things up and running so we can have 2) a chance to kick the Mantle's tires.

 

[Chernobyl]

The current timeline is this... and as I mentioned before... this first time WILL be unique and somewhat out of order, but what we are trying to do is get the regiments up to speed as soon as possible.

If you want it done quick, it won't be done right. If you want it done right, it won't be done quick.

I appreciate your efforts into getting the 405th organised and running 'to spec', Art, but don't you think that it's far better to sort out these issues before they pile up, rather than the wagon rolling down the road, throwing a wheel, and then the community going 'well shucks, doesn't that suck' when you've spilled your load across the asphalt?. Most of the issues that have been brought to your attention are either small concerns caused by some poor phrasing (which could be solved now by clarifying a few points in the Charter), or larger concerns stemming from how recognition and privilege are shared out amongst the community (which would be better off dealt with now as opposed to allowing dissent to brew).

I honestly do understand that you're trying to get this pushed out of the door, Art, I really do. You're doing a fantastic job, but please - as much as I support the Mantle, don't push an unfinished product. Deal with these concerns now rather than letting them become a larger problem - as much as I don't like to echo Zaff in some regards, these problems have been pulled up by the majority of the members that have had the time to look over the Mantle, and given that there's such a vocal concern over some of these things, I urge you to deal with them now rather than trotting out a product knowing there are issues.

 

[Art Andrews]

If you want it done quick, it won't be done right. If you want it done right, it won't be done quick.

I appreciate your efforts into getting the 405th organised and running 'to spec', Art, but don't you think that it's far better to sort out these issues before they pile up, rather than the wagon rolling down the road, throwing a wheel, and then the community going 'well shucks, doesn't that suck' when you've spilled your load across the asphalt?. Most of the issues that have been brought to your attention are either small concerns caused by some poor phrasing (which could be solved now by clarifying a few points in the Charter), or larger concerns stemming from how recognition and privilege are shared out amongst the community (which would be better off dealt with now as opposed to allowing dissent to brew).

I understand where you are coming from on this and even agree... to a point. We are actively addressing a couple of concerns as we speak. As you pointed out several posts back, there IS some copy in the Mantle that isn't clear. We are working on clarifying that copy. Beyond that, as I mentioned above, there is a section missing from the Membership area. I am not going to debate it right now, but if you read through, there are references to Auxiliary Members, yet we don't actually define those. While correcting that isn't going to give some of you all the things you want, it WILL address some of the issues and confusion.

With that being said, we are moving forward and the reason why is that is we sit and discuss this until everyone is satisfied, we will 1) never start the club and 2) have nothing left but a bunch of useless ribbons and medals to hand out for people just waking up in the morning. I am not willing to let that happen. I could be wrong, but I believe the issues that have been brought up are minor course corrections that can be made over time. I believe the core of the structure we have built has been tested and is solid. With that in mind, I am willing to take a 343i/Microsoft approach and if we need to push out an update on launch day... well... we will.

I honestly do understand that you're trying to get this pushed out of the door, Art, I really do. You're doing a fantastic job, but please - as much as I support the Mantle, don't push an unfinished product. Deal with these concerns now rather than letting them become a larger problem - as much as I don't like to echo @Zaff in some regards, these problems have been pulled up by the majority of the members that have had the time to look over the Mantle, and given that there's such a vocal concern over some of these things, I urge you to deal with them now rather than trotting out a product knowing there are issues.

Again, the only two true issues I see right now are 1) there is some copy, especially regarding Membership Type B that is poorly written and confusing. We should have that corrected today. 2) We reference Auxiliary Members, but don't define them or what they can/can't do. It is not my intent to be dismissive, but I feel a lot of the rest of the pushback we are seeing comes down to differences in ideology more than true breakage points within the structure of the club we are trying to create.

 

[Art Andrews]

I'm of the belief that a person's credentials will speak for themselves - if they've taken active roles within that Regiment, they'll have built up a name for themselves and rallied support. In much the same way as an American election has drives before the actual voting takes place, the people who have proven themselves to be worthy leaders will get the votes. Any Jack or Joe can run for office, but without the support of their people behind them, they aren't going to get many votes. That's democracy in action - people with a talent for leading will invariably find themselves in a position to do so.

Not to make too light of the issue, or to delve into politics... but have you watched the last couple of elections? :lol

That's not to say that I believe that literally anybody should be able to run for Regimental command positions - as much as I advocate democracy and the democratic process, I also advocate a limiting process to ensure that only viable candidates hit the pool. I'd suggest that any member who has organised and/or attended Regimental events would be eligible to run for office, and perhaps expand the pool of eligible voters to at least Regimental-level event attendees.

This is a good point and I want to go a bit further into it. Let's take a very high level view of the club and its purpose. From the highest level, we are creating a club so that we can organize the community's presence at physical events and the primary reason we would be present at a physical event is because we have costumes. I think some people are looking at us saying only Type C members are eligible for a CO position as some type of reward for having a costume. That is not entirely true or even mostly true. A CO position is not a position of power and glory. It is a worker bee, just as all of the staff positions, from top to bottom, are worker bee positions. The staff isn't here to reign over the community so the community can serve them. They are here to serve the community in the way they feel is best for the community as a whole. With that in mind, and considering that the CO is more or less overseeing and organizing members for costuming events, we feel it is important that the person doing that has experience with it, or as you put it, are VIABLE candidates. Now we could debate this endlessly and get into minor nitpicks about people who bought vs people who build and on and on and on, but at the end of the day, we feel that a good general guideline for viability is having a costume. From there, the members of the Regiment can determine if the rest of that individuals credentials and character are what they want to represent them.

You suggest allowing anyone who has organized or attends a Regimental event be eligible to run for office. There is just no way we would ever let that happen. I have attended too many events with people who are great behind a table, but could never lead... and I am sure anyone who has spent any time in a group could atest to that. There is just no way.

 

[Ashuraa]

If you want it done quick, it won't be done right. If you want it done right, it won't be done quick.

I appreciate your efforts into getting the 405th organised and running 'to spec', Art, but don't you think that it's far better to sort out these issues before they pile up, rather than the wagon rolling down the road, throwing a wheel, and then the community going 'well shucks, doesn't that suck' when you've spilled your load across the asphalt?. Most of the issues that have been brought to your attention are either small concerns caused by some poor phrasing (which could be solved now by clarifying a few points in the Charter), or larger concerns stemming from how recognition and privilege are shared out amongst the community (which would be better off dealt with now as opposed to allowing dissent to brew).

I honestly do understand that you're trying to get this pushed out of the door, Art, I really do. You're doing a fantastic job, but please - as much as I support the Mantle, don't push an unfinished product. Deal with these concerns now rather than letting them become a larger problem - as much as I don't like to echo Zaff in some regards, these problems have been pulled up by the majority of the members that have had the time to look over the Mantle, and given that there's such a vocal concern over some of these things, I urge you to deal with them now rather than trotting out a product knowing there are issues.

@FANGS and I were going over the Mantle last night and noticed something that may be causing a bit of the confusion that we are seeing here. It has been 6 months or more since we worked out the details on it and in reading over the Membership section, it seems to me we are missing a section. We reference it in a couple of places but the actual section seems to be missing. We are going to go over it and once we have determined where the issue is, we will come back and discuss it further. Until then, I am not going to debate it any more because well... that missing part might answer many questions.

Chernobyl , Art Andrews and FANGS have both looked at the mantle and have noticed something is missing. They are going to be looking it over. It will take time for them to find the piece they realize is missing, and get it straightened out. With that piece it might give that clarification that you are asking for.

I have not said much on this topic openly for many reasons. First and foremost is that I along with the other staff members seek to keep as clear and concise a message to all of you that we can. To many people in the pot can and often does muddy the water. I can honestly tell you that we have been debating the issues that have been brought forward, such as some other way to gain a tier c ranking, within the staff. I will not comment on exactly what has been said, nor where those discussions have lead to at this time.

After reading what Caboose stated, and reading the other posts, repeatedly, has helped clarify my own thoughts.

I know I am relatively new to this forum, but I can tell you that I have been through many similar situations. I have helped in the set up and running of many online communities over the last 20 years. Over all the mantle as stated has many valid, and good points. They are there to help make this community grow, and to help people know who to take issues to, where to take them to, and helps make those responses consistent. Consistency is one thing that I noticed was lacking before Art and his company bought the 405th. The 405th was a hare-im, scare-im, mishmash before. Since the renewal, things here on the site have gotten better, it is much more active, and it appears to be growing. Things are going to get better in the future as well.

As for issues with the mantle, and the club, it is brand spanking new. It is growing and evolving, which is what is is supposed to do as we as a community interact with it and with in it. We will face bumps, some of them very hard bumps, but they will be gotten over, and dealt with.

Will we all like how each and every change will be? Nope. There will be/ has always been at least one person whom any given change will disturb. Sometimes that person/s have valid reasons. Sometimes they are simply so comfortable with how it was that how it is now is scarey, confusing, and uncomfortable that they raise all hell. I can say that staff and leadership are listening. We are considering what the community is saying. It does not mean that in every issue will we side with those who are speaking out, because of reasons that they may not know about.

In any community being in a leadership position is a very difficult place to be. Not all your decisions will be popular. Hell, some of them will be down right hated. You will step on peoples toes, and you will have to make hard decisions. What I am asking the community as a whole is to be courteous, civil, and to understand that there will come times when we, as staff, sometimes will have to say simply that something will just have to be a certain way, because we have made a decision.

 

[Traghatti]

Zaff

And since I've been here for every ONE Halo build thread I've seen at least 2-3 NON-Halo builds.

Where? Where are you facts to back up this claim? I checked the forums this morning- I can easily say that 90% of the threads there are Halo related. If you don’t believe me I’ll send you a screen shot. Please don’t pull bogus numbers out of thin air for a logical basis of an argument.
As far as your argument being this wasn’t a Halo centered community--What game do you see represented in the banner at the top of the webpage – Halo. What does the logo represent-Halo. What game did the former owner (Adam Grumbo) start this site for-Halo. I like seeing other non-halo stuff here, it makes me want to try something different. Should that content be removed? It’s not harming anyone, so no, why bother? But using explicit language on the verge of personal attacks isn’t going to help you or them.

Would this be the part where we get to tell Art (and, if I'm not mistaken, Fangs as well) that he's no longer recognized as 405th, let alone a staff member, because he doesn't have a completed build and a thread documenting it?

If you’re going down the road of trying to use their logic against them, please also backup your claim, please present a completed HALO costume for this, primarily, Halo forum, or should we also no longer recognize you as a 405th member? As you yourself stated, not every member has a completed costume, if started one at all.

the concerns and issues of the community while lying through their damn teeth in saying they're doing all of this with the community in mind

No one here is lying. They’ve laid out the entire Mantle for you to read and ask questions about. If you’re going to accuse someone of lying have facts of the matter. They’re trying to be open and honest. They may reserve judgment until they’ve thought it through or mention anything. You don’t run through the street without looking both ways, do you?

This community has survived, and thrived, without you or your thrice-damned "club" so again I ask WHY the blue hell do we NEED your club?

I don’t know about you, but I don’t like computer viruses, or malware. Survived, yes. Thrived, that’s arguable. I’m sure many have stopped using the site because of issues like that. Now someone has stepped in, cleaned it up, and given it a facelift, and made it a bit more organized, and you’re asking why we need it?

Go into the other threads where this subject comes up and you'll find more names added to our side of the debate

Where? Please provide these names, or threads. Again-provide facts to backup your claims. Please let those people speak up on their own if they have serious concerns. There's already enough heresay to go around. And this isn't even about us vs them. It's about how to better organize the community.

It’s nice to see that you’re concerned.
However, by using all the foul language and brash, harsh arguments you’re not portraying or representing the 405th in a good light to the people who are trying to help it. Doing so could get you banned. And as Chernobyl stated, that won’t help anyone’s case. Although they’re new, they have every right to be here – just like you do. I honestly don't see you, me, or the majority of members here throwing cash or pitching in time to host a new server and develop new site content. So Instead of calling them liars, and people who don’t care..Maybe step back a minute and realize that although there are going to be things you don’t like they’re at least willing to work with you and tweak it. We're lucky there's even a discussion about this, they could have just as easily come in, thrown out all the non-Halo stuff, put strict rules in from another website, and called it a day.

Chernobyl
Non-costuming deployed members will be able to wear 405th shirts, assist at events as handlers and setter-uppers, and act as the 'film crew' you mentioned in an earlier paragraph. The media is likely to focus on the costumed members, certainly, but that doesn't mean that non-costuming members are going to be forgotten

This- We have members who help us with our gear, costumes, etc. However when people (Like Mircrosoft) want someone on stage, guess who you see-- The people in costumes only. The handlers aren’t on stage, or the pep designers, or modelers. You don’t see the film crew, producers, or production assistants in the movies, ever. Though the handlers are welcomed with us as a group if we’re invited somewhere, this is how it normally goes down.
For fighter pilots there’s always a debate- The pilot takes most of the risk flying missions and getting shot at. But the Crew chief is the one who maintains the aircraft and fixes whatever happens. So whose plane is it? They could both argue it’s theirs. However in the end the planes purpose is to fly those missions. The crew chief and staff are supporting members who don’t usually see combat.

Cadet
And yes, some people did still have Tables or booths at Cons, but those people either knew and were in contact with the Owners outside of the Forums, or did it of their own volition and did so while violating those existing rules, and they did so to varying degrees of success.

Within the Pacific Regiment we did have direct permission from the former owner to do so. So yes, you either need to get permission or risk get in trouble doing otherwise.

Art Andrews
Let's take a very high level view of the club and its purpose. From the highest level, we are creating a club so that we can organize the community's presence at physical events and the primary reason we would be present at a physical event is because we have costumes.

This I can understand. If you’re going to showcase something at a convention, it would be nice to show some of your nicer work. Though I do think, sometimes, that having some of the less quality builds shows that we’re still just every folks, we’re not all movie professional builders. I think that’s why many people can still relate to us is because we’re still essentially “one of them” and it's not an elitest forum. That’s why I don’t think we should exclude those who don’t have a “perfect” builds for events. I can show you pictures of my builds from crappy to getting really good. It made me motivated to make it better. And yes, I didn’t really get into going to official events until I felt it was better. But I was never hindered from attending.

Art Andrews
Not to make too light of the issue, or to delve into politics... but have you watched the last couple of elections?

Zing!

 

[Art Andrews]

Traghatti, I am greatly annoyed that the software only allows me to like your post ONCE.

 

[Art Andrews]

I want to pause here for a moment because there is something that needs to be addressed.

We are more than willing to debate these points and hash them out.

We are willing to listen to constructive criticism and give it serious consideration.

We understand that many of you feel very passionately about your POV and as long as you are championing that POV with facts or with logic and reason we are willing to listen.

However, a line has been crossed here and in no small way. @Zaff, if you, or anyone, makes another post like your last, it will be your last. My willingness to suffer a post like that is absolutely zero. You will apologize to @FANGS and the rest of the staff for your mischaracterization of them and you will refrain from any further comments of that nature. If there is any lack of clarity about that point, you are welcome to message me and I will ensure it is absolutely crystal.

With that being said, let's continue forward and see what we can do to work out these issues and the community presses onward and upward.

 

[foxleader]

art this isn't the frist time his crossed that line in fact its been quite a few times got a few threads closed because of him and they where lore threads at that. zaff over does things to the point of glassing a thread because of someone or something.

 

[Chernobyl]

Not to make too light of the issue, or to delve into politics... but have you watched the last couple of elections? :lol

Yes. And American politics are pretty well governed by who has the most money, who bought out who, and who smeared the others the most. While I'm not so worried about elections here on the 405th becoming smear campaigns, I am worried that elections are going to devolve into a circular run of the same few members with the disposable income to create costumes, as opposed to opening the electoral process to all components.

You suggest allowing anyone who has organized or attends a Regimental event be eligible to run for office. There is just no way we would ever let that happen. I have attended too many events with people who are great behind a table, but could never lead... and I am sure anyone who has spent any time in a group could atest to that. There is just no way.

Problem is, that's more or less exactly what you are doing. Here, let's read the Mantle together:

A Deployed Member is eligible to:

• Vote in polls of the Deployed Membership.
• Vote in local elections.
• Run for and/or hold elected or appointed offices in the 405th.
• Coordinate/host official 405th events as designated or allowed by their unit leader.

And the Mantle defines a Deployed member as...?

• Meets all 405th Deployed Membership Requirements (i.e. ownership of an approved costume, is over 18 years of age, etc).
• Has submitted and had approved a Deployed Membership application.
• Maintains active contact with their Regiment/Battalion.
• Participates in at least one Regiment/Battalion or Division activity per year* while wearing an approved 405th costume owned by said member as recorded during their application. Examples of an activity include, but are not limited to conventions, charity events, or any activity designated as an event by a coordinating administrative unit of the 405th.

Now, I mean no offence here, but... does this, or does this not, mean that any costume-owning member, can both organise events and run for Regimental office? Despite your assurance above that this is not the goal of the Mantle? Please, stop me if I'm wrong. It's your Mantle, after all. You even say the following here:

With that in mind, and considering that the CO is more or less overseeing and organizing members for costuming events, we feel it is important that the person doing that has experience with it, or as you put it, are VIABLE candidates. Now we could debate this endlessly and get into minor nitpicks about people who bought vs people who build and on and on and on, but at the end of the day, we feel that a good general guideline for viability is having a costume.

Am I getting warmer here? Because I'm fairly sure that I'm picking the weave of this apart and finding it insubstantial. You're contradicting yourself on an incredibly fundamental level here, Art - either what you say here is true, or the Mantle is the writ of law. One or the other has to be wrong here - the Mantle says that any costuming member is allowed to run for an organisational role, while you say otherwise and suggest cherry-picking candidates (which invalidates the democratic process entirely). However, let's move on, here:

My overall intent is to find a balance where all members of their constituent Regiment are allowed a voice in the running of their Regiment - however, only those with the experience to organise will be allowed to run for Regimental office. I think you'll find that my goals run parallel to your own - I'm not suggesting we begin to tear down the entire Mantle, word-by-word, and re-write the entire article from scratch, at all. I'm not asking you to give brand-new members the ability to run for an official position within their Regiments. I'm simply asking that you broaden the scope of the CO voting procedure to the entire Regiment, as opposed to a select few. This will ensure that, at a Regimental level, everybody has a voice and the ability to vote in the person they want, from a pool of suitable candidates.

As I said before - true democracy in action ensures that the most viable candidate wins.

EDIT:

art this isn't the frist time his crossed that line in fact its been quite a few times got a few threads closed because of him and they where lore threads at that. zaff over does things to the point of glassing a thread because of someone or something.

That doesn't mean that you should stoke the fires. Zaff's been given a warning already, leave it at that.

 

[FANGS]

Alrighty folks.....so Art and I were talking last night and we realized, as he has mentioned, that at some point in the zillions of rewrites, we left a part out. We've mentioned Auxillary elsewhere in the mantle but somehow when we finalized the tiers it wasn't there. SO, bit of a rewrite is happening with that. Ultimately Auxilliary ends up being Tier C and Deployed is Tier D.

The contradiction as pointed out by Chernobyl is actually soley due to the missing Tier and thus confusing. Tiers A and B are our forum members. They are NOT permitted to represent the 405th. Tier C are our Auxillary members. This is where the point about being able to represent with the consent of your CO fits in. They are also able to do merchandise runs with the consent of their CO. They must have a forum account and 50 posts or more (note that this has been waived for all current people who will fall in to this category due to the service they have already provided to their units as we've previously discussed with the current Reg moderators) and they need to attend one event per year as a contributing member - handler, working the booth etc. It still remains that only the costumed tier can vote or run for office.

 

[Chernobyl]

Alrighty folks.....so Art and I were talking last night and we realized, as he has mentioned, that at some point in the zillions of rewrites, we left a part out. We've mentioned Auxillary elsewhere in the mantle but somehow when we finalized the tiers it wasn't there. SO, bit of a rewrite is happening with that. Ultimately Auxilliary ends up being Tier C and Deployed is Tier D.

The contradiction as pointed out by @Chernobyl is actually soley due to the missing Tier and thus confusing. Tiers A and B are our forum members. They are NOT permitted to represent the 405th. Tier C are our Auxillary members. This is where the point about being able to represent with the consent of your CO fits in. They are also able to do merchandise runs with the consent of their CO. They must have a forum account and 50 posts or more (note that this has been waived for all current people who will fall in to this category due to the service they have already provided to their units as we've previously discussed with the current Reg moderators) and they need to attend one event per year as a contributing member - handler, working the booth etc. It still remains that only the costumed tier can vote or run for office.

That's all still extremely vague, and doesn't explain exactly why only Tier D members are eligible for office. In fact, I'll refer you back to my previous post - regardless of this new clarification, you're still faced with an extremely problematic contradiction between what Art's said and what the Mantle expresses.

Might want to look into that and potentially bend his ear about how this whole thing is going, because frankly, I'm not filled with the greatest of confidence over this. You might also find that giving an explanation of your reasoning behind why certain tiers are disqualified from representing the community might calm some fears. I personally understand some of the reasoning, if not all of it - however, in the interests of trying to get everybody on the same page, a discussion about why certain decisions were reached might go a long way to addressing some concerns.

 

[Art Andrews]

Now, I mean no offence here, but... does this, or does this not, mean that any costume-owning member, can both organise events and run for Regimental office? Despite your assurance above that this is not the goal of the Mantle? Please, stop me if I'm wrong. It's your Mantle, after all.

Somewhere we are not understanding one another. I said we would not let just anyone who has manned an event run for office. And no, not just ANY costuming-owning member can organize and event or run for Office. A DEPLOYED member, who meets the criteria you listed above can coordinate an event as designated or allowed by their unit leader. A DEPLOYED member can also run for office. As you seem to be pointing out, the ownership of a costume IS the primary difference, and we do think that makes a differnece in the overall perspective of a member. Does it mean someone with a costume will be a better leader than one without? Not necessarily, but we feel, since the club aspect of this community does primarily revolve around costume-centric events that it is a good general idea to have a costumer at the head of each Regiment. You seem to be seeing a huge contradiction there, but I am still not seeing it.

Am I getting warmer here? Because I'm fairly sure that I'm picking the weave of this apart and finding it insubstantial. You're contradicting yourself on an incredibly fundamental level here, Art - either what you say here is true, or the Mantle is the writ of law. One or the other has to be wrong here - the Mantle says that any costuming member is allowed to run for an organisational role, while you say otherwise and suggest cherry-picking candidates (which invalidates the democratic process entirely).

Again, maybe it is just a bad day, but I am still not seeing this, so lets try to see if there is some technical issue or if we are still just misunderstanding one another.

From Article IV - Elections:
Active Deployed members in good standing are eligible to run for CO.

From Article I - Membership:
A Deployed Member is eligible to:
Run for and/or hold elected or appointed offices in the 405th.

So... the Mantle says any Deployed Member in good standing can run for office.

Where do you see me saying otherwise? From this quote:

"You suggest allowing anyone who has organized or attends a Regimental event be eligible to run for office. There is just no way we would ever let that happen. I have attended too many events with people who are great behind a table, but could never lead... and I am sure anyone who has spent any time in a group could atest to that. There is just no way."

Perhaps I worded that poorly (even then, I don't see how it contradicts the Mantle) but in essence, what I was saying is that someone manning a table is not enough to qualify them to run for office. Again.. not seeing a contradiction there, or where that is cherry-picking, but if you are still seeing one, let's get it hammered out.

My overall intent is to find a balance where all members of their constituent Regiment are allowed a voice in the running of their Regiment - however, only those with the experience to organise will be allowed to run for Regimental office. I think you'll find that my goals run parallel to your own - I'm not suggesting we begin to tear down the entire Mantle, word-by-word, and re-write the entire article from scratch, at all. I'm not asking you to give brand-new members the ability to run for an official position within their Regiments. I'm simply asking that you broaden the scope of the CO voting procedure to the entire Regiment, as opposed to a select few. This will ensure that, at a Regimental level, everybody has a voice and the ability to vote in the person they want, from a pool of suitable candidates.

On this point, I absolutely understand your argument, but I don't agree that this approach is what is best for the community as a whole. Is it the most even-handed? Sure. Can't argue that. 1 man, 1 vote and all that. Can't argue that 1:1 isn't pretty even from a mathematical standpoint, but there are other things to consider, some of which you have pretty much helped make my point for me. I have written you privately about this, so I will just summarize my feelings here.

• The Regiments and anything pertaining to the club aspect of this community will ALWAYS be costume-centric.
• The major events that these clubs attend will predominantly be costume-centric.
• Because we have made room for non-costuming members (most costuming clubs don't) the number of non-costuming members to costuming members will be horrendously skewed towards non-costuming members.
• If allowed to vote, non-costuming members would always have a majority, yet the club and events are costume-centric.
• This means non-costuming members would be able to dictate to costuming members how things are going to be in a costume-centric club.

I just can't see the logic in allowing that.

As I said before - true democracy in action ensures that the most viable candidate wins.

I would again point you to the "fabulous" democracy of our country and the results it has garnered.... Democracy has its place, but it isn't the end-all be-all of equality and fairness, nor is it the right answer for all situations.

 

[SirPalesAlot]

I would again point you to the "fabulous" democracy of our country and the results it has garnered.... Democracy has its place, but it isn't the end-all be-all of equality and fairness, nor is it the right answer for all situations.

I wasn't going to jump into this topic, but this bugs me to no end. The United States isn't a democracy, it is a republic. Some things might resemble a democracy more these days, but that still isn't really the point. I would much rather see this club go the route of republic instead of democracy (it seems like that is the case based on how the Mantle is written), but I still think the wording needs to be a bit less ambiguous in some spots. A long time ago I was excited about the possibility of the 405th becoming an official group, but I can't say that is the case right now. I'm still on the fence right now, and I would like to see most of the good points brought up by other members addressed completely.



This will probably be the only post I make in this thread (I prefer to lurk lol). If I have any concern that is not brought up by someone else then I will show back up again.

 

[Art Andrews]

Point taken and you are right, of course. Keep in mind that this community has never been, nor is now a democracy or a republic.

We are trying to offer an opportunity for members to choose their own local leadership as opposed to us simply appointing those leaders, but sadly, instead of seeing this as us giving a bit, we are being told that we aren't giving enough. It is something we are simply going to have to work though until we find a balance.

In regard to ambiguousness in the Mantle, there are two likely reasons 1) we don't know how something will play out, so we are leaving things vague until we have had a chance to see them in action or 2) we want to allow leeway and have options instead of painting ourselves into a corner. I suspect, over the course of 2015, you will see many revisions and you will see those ambiguous sections become much more direct.

I wasn't going to jump into this topic, but this bugs me to no end. The United States isn't a democracy, it is a republic. Some things might resemble a democracy more these days, but that still isn't really the point. I would much rather see this club go the route of republic instead of democracy (it seems like that is the case based on how the Mantle is written), but I still think the wording needs to be a bit less ambiguous in some spots. A long time ago I was excited about the possibility of the 405th becoming an official group, but I can't say that is the case right now. I'm still on the fence right now, and I would like to see most of the good points brought up by other members addressed completely.



This will probably be the only post I make in this thread (I prefer to lurk lol). If I have any concern that is not brought up by someone else then I will show back up again.