[BotRH Org Discussion] Red Arms?

[Jeannaisais]

I know we talked about them before but, give me ideas for how these should be included in the Band. Before they were the police force, do we keep it that way or change it up ccompletely?

 

Give me your ideas!! NOW!!!

 

And yes, you get points for posting in here, for February, so think hard!

[Andrej]

I like the idea of Red Arms policing the Band. Not necessarily in a way of them being strict on the rules, but generally just being active and assigning fines for 'violations'. Spill a drink? Drink more until you can't stand. Stumble across a brawl? Jump in first, naturally, then fine those involved with something funny. Helping the Infants dig latrines or the Cav mucking out the stables.

[BridMorgan]

It's funny you posted this today.  I was going to ask about RAs and what happened to them.  LOL  I have to say, I do miss the RAs.  I mean, I spilt 2 regimental drinks and no one punished me for it.  I was a bit sad.  *wink*  I liked having them and it was always fun to see what they came up with for punishments and I did like taking a spin or two as an RA when we had term officers.

Edited February 1, 2013 by BridMorgan

[Davrick]

Hmm I think it would be cool to have them around. Not sure in what way yet. Ill add more when I'm off of work and have a chance to think about it more.

[F Horn of Valere]

I still think we need to incorporate their "elite" status... they are not just the police, but they are also the most reliable soldiers that Mat could trust with peoples' lives. But, I also understand a need/desire to use them as we have in the past, and they do have a little bit of a police purpose, especially earlier on. They actually are a lot like bouncers. In the U.S. military, sometimes senior NCOs have to go on a rotation around local bars, keeping young soldiers out of trouble... this is the impression that I get as the purpose of the Redarms-- elite, but with a secondary policing duty that is also important.

 

Ok, so what would I propose? Really not much different than we've done before. Keep things as they are, but have one Redarm from each Regiment be an officer or above, and one Redarm from each Regiment be selected from all ranks in the Regiment. The first one would be senior. Make it temporary, and appointed by the CG, like before.

[BridMorgan]

Yup, I agree with Horn.  I definately think it should be a rotation, I don't really care for permenant positions outside of the top 3 spots.  I understand why the CG has become a permenant position because of lack of activity, but I think letting members have shots at different "jobs" (for lack of a better word) is important so I would definately vote for it to be a rotating position.  Bring back the Red Arms!!!    

[Davrick]

Hmm I'd love to be a Red Arm!

[Andrej]

I agree with both Horn and Brid about it being a rotating billet. In the US military we have a 'shore patrol' who is usually a group of senior enlistedmen. NCO and above, with an officer as the patrol commander. So perhaps the RAs would be enlistedmen from each regiment with one officer as the commander that rotates amongst the regiments for every term

[Andrej]

Yarr... double post.

Edited February 2, 2013 by Andrej

[dicetosser1]

whered you spill em brid? Ill fine you happily as I am a RA.

 

I agree with keeping them the way they were but impressing the idea that they need to be active and taking part in stuff.

 

My only concern is brand newbies becoming RAs. the way it is now RR time is really quick. i think you have to have been here so many mths or reached a certain rank before being RA. the rank doesnt have to be high but does have to imply you have been here and active for a while

[Andrej]

What would you suggest? Typically the patrol is made up of NCOs (Corporals and Sergeants) and overseen by an officer. Usually a LT or captain

[Andrej]

Yup, I agree with Horn.  I definately think it should be a rotation, I don't really care for permenant positions outside of the top 3 spots.  I understand why the CG has become a permenant position because of lack of activity, but I think letting members have shots at different "jobs" (for lack of a better word) is important so I would definately vote for it to be a rotating position.  Bring back the Red Arms!!!    

I think Brid brings up a good point here. If the position was rotational it would give something for members to strive for. With my experience in the military, people are more motivated when they have an attainable goal. Now obviously this might not be the case here as we aren't all military members, but at least for people newer to the Band it could be something they could look forward to and encourage them to take a bigger part within the SG in order to reach this goal.

[Andrej]

I agree somewhat with Dice about not letting "newbies" become RAs, but at the same time I think it should be something attainable within reason. To say that you've been in the Band for a certain amount of months, regardless of how active you've been, could be discouraging. I think the RAs should be a small group within the Band. Like I suggested before, take a NCO (Corporal-Master Sergeant) from each regiment as RAs then have a rotational commander. For starters, maybe the regiment with the most officers will have the first RA Commander or something along those lines. I think each regiment should elect their own RAs, and then allow the officers or CGs of each regiment to present their case about who should be the RA Commander and then allow the MG or other big wigs to decide who will lead them. I view the RAs as a smaller group set aside from the basic rules of the Band, they can fine anyone, but at the same time need to be active and dish out enjoyable/funny fines.

[Andrej]

Also, just another idea, the RA position should be somewhat of a reward. If you get elected as a RA for your regiment for that period (say, 2/3 month terms?) then each month you get an additional amount of points added to your earnings.

 

10 points per month for RAs

20 points per month for RACs

 

It would be like additional pay, similar to those the senior officers get. It goes along with what Horn said about RAs being held as elite positions.

Edited February 2, 2013 by Andrej

[dicetosser1]

I was thinking at least Sergeant

[F Horn of Valere]

For those fairly new, it might be helpful to know what we have already had in place before. Some of the new ideas suggested are actually old ones that never technically ended!

 

The old system was as follows:

 

Each term (1-3 months depending on the era of band history), the new CG (as it was a temporary position) would assign all members of his/her Regimental staff, including two Redarms. Out of ALL the Redarms, the MG would appoint a Redarm Leader (although not required of the MG, this was the highest-ranking Redarm every single time.) 

 

If someone committed a crime (channelling, spilling brew, assaulting a senior officer, etc), it was the job of the Redarms to bring them to trial. If a Redarm did not see it, it was the job of regular Banders to point it out to a Redarm, but regular Banders were not allowed to start a trial. During the trial (a thread in the Courtroom-- a public board for Redarms), the accused presented a defense, and the accusing Redarm acted as prosecutor. At the end of the trial, all Redarms voted guilty or not-guilty, with the RAL being any tie-breaker vote. Later on, we added the feature of including a public vote, and the results of said vote would count as one additional "Redarm" vote. (So there would be up to 6 Redarms voting, plus one more vote determined by the masses.) If guilty, the Redarms determined a punishment. I believe this was decided by either the prosecuting Redarm, the RAL, or the Redarms via a private discussion and consensus, again, depending on which era of Band history.

 

At one point, the RAL invented "spot fines" as a joke. Instead of bringing a Band member to trial, he issued a Spot Fine for minor offenses (spilling brew, etc), and acted as judge and jury, issuing a punishment, usually lighter than might be included in a guilty verdict in a trial. Although intended as a joke, it was taken seriously, and enough Banders liked the idea that it stuck and was written into Band Law. (speaking of which, Jea, before Redarms are really reintroduced to their full capacity, the Band Law needs a serious revamping. Given how legalistic it morphed into, and how redundant it is with DM policy and common sense, it might be best to just set aside the old one and start fresh, rather than modifying the old one.) If a Band member was issued a Spot Fine, and that member thought it harsh or even proclaimed innocent, the member could demand a trial, however if found guilty, the original punishment given in the Spot Fine was tripled to discourage occupying the court's time with meaningless protests to every Spot Fine.

 

At one time, we also instituted Staff Pay throughout the board, and the Redarms were included in that system.

 

Edit: I also should add-- the Regimental boards were the sole domain of Redarms from said Regiment. Offenses made in private boards were never clearly defined-- which is why I think it would be good for there to be a senior and a junior redarm in each Regiment-- so there is clear command structure in cases when the RAL can't see the offending post because it is in a private board. I still think there should be an overall RAL as well though, such as the highest-ranking of the three Senior Redarms.

Edited February 2, 2013 by F Horn of Valere

[Andrej]

I can't argue with that. Not to sound radical, but maybe our enlisted ranks need restructuring. There are only a few enlisted ranks above Private and Private First Class. It's easy to attain Corporal or Sergeant, and then Master Sergeant is the next rank past then before you become an officer. I think there should be more, in most military branches enlisted men hold a very crucial key to the development and general running of the unit. For example, in the USMC Master Sergeant isn't the highest attainable enlisted rank. We should add a few. Either a rank between Sergeant or Master Sergeant or a rank after Master Sergeant.

 

My suggestions, being an actual military member, would be to either add Staff Sergeant before Master Sergeant or to add Sergeant Major after Master Sergeant. Then again the Sergeant Major billet could be looked at as a special billet, a unique position. In all military branches the Sergeant Major (SgtMaj) is looked at as the senior enlisted advisor to the CO. In this case, the MG could appoint someone as such.

[Andrej]

I agree with Horn on a lot of topics, although I believe there should only be one RA leader. Pick an enlisted men from each regiment, and then have all the Brass vote for a RA commander (RAC) with a rotational position amongst the regiments. I'm sure I've brought up a lot of points from the old style such as pay and assorted things, but I think that would work the best. If you are elected as a RA or RAC then you should receive the appropriate benefits. Likewise though, I agree that it shouldn't be brand-new members of the Band but also not such a high ranking position that it wouldn't be attainable to those who haven't necessarily been around since the start of the Band. I think if we added a rank or two to the enlisted structure before making them officers, it would make the process better, as well as electing as Sergeant Major to oversee the enlisted personnel. Perhaps each regiment could implement their own SgtMaj as well as one for the Band in its entirety. That would make the most sense and would also be the most realistic as far as true military rank structures went.

[F Horn of Valere]

Andrej, I've thought about this quite a lot myself. (And for some perspective as to my familiarity with military ranks... when I joined the Band, I was fresh on my promotion to E-4, and later made E-5. Right now I am an O-1).

 

The problem with the use of NCOs is outside of the real military, it would be a broken system. The whole point of a SGM being with a CO is that the SGM has a ton of experience, way more than the junior officers. In a point-based rank system, the Butter Bar has more experience than the SGM. The only way to fix that is to be like the real military where there are two tracks: laborers (enlisted) and management (Officers)... in an online community, there is both not really a point to having that setup, and it would not be practical as too few would see a benefit to remaining at a lower rank when they could be higher.

 

Also, while in real life, it is designed for the number of individuals to be bottom-heavy (more lower-enlisted than Jr. NCOs, more Jr. NCOs than Sr. NCOs, etc), that does not work in an online, voluntary, point-based system. If there were not room for advancement, fewer would stay... really the only way to deal with people advancing ranks too quickly is to make ranks worth more points, which we have done a couple times.

 

For me, more compelling than any of those considerations above, it is also important to remember that we are not a modern military organization... as demonstrated in the WoT, the NCOs of the various military organizations are who become the officers-- Randland armies have one career track, not like today's military's two tracks. During some of my time in some leadership positions, I lost sight of the fact that we are a Randland army and not a U.S. Army, to the detriment of my Regiment, and later the Band.

 

Edit:

Another good way to think about it... due to the necessities of being an online all-volunteer group (while U.S. military is all-volunteer to sign up,  accomplishing your duties is not voluntary after signing the line!)... the enlisted serve the purpose of the real-life lower-enlisted, while the officers serve the purpose of the real-life NCOs.

Edited February 2, 2013 by F Horn of Valere

[Andrej]

Out of curiosity, what branch do you belong to? I, personally, am a Sergeant of Marines and so I speak from my personal experience of leading troops in a small unit environment. I agree that it would be hard to regulate ranks in a point system that is based, for the most part, on activity within the SG; but at the same time instead of making the points needed to reach a certain rank, you could just add more. Currently, there are only 4 enlisted ranks. Private through Master Sergeant. You could easily implement more and that would make the stock of those available to be RAs larger. Not to call anyone out in particular, but BFG went from PVT to UL in literally a month. Now you and I both know that is a broken promotional system considering that I have been active duty for over 4 years and am only an E5. I was just trying to offer solutions, I think the position of RA should be reserved to those who are deserving and therefore elected by each regiment. If you don't agree that each regiment should only have one, then perhaps those with more members could elect more. Say one RA for every 5-10 ACTIVE members, etc. I think the biggest part of being a RA is that you MUST be active. How else will you assign spot fines?

[Andrej]

I just read your edit. I guess I still have a hard time separating the two considering that I, myself, have been a NCO for so long but I understand what you are saying. We should have a designated range of ranks that would be available to be RAs then. Say... Sergeant through UL? Perhaps maybe a step or two higher in the officer ranks but none above. The senior member of the RA, the RAC, should be of one regiment and be the only person of the RAs that ranks that high. I also think that if you took one person from each regiment, not including the RAC, that it would make the RAs a small bunch and therefore a more 'elite' group of Band members. They would each be elected for each term by their regiment and therefore could be considered the best of the best.

[F Horn of Valere]

I am in the Army.

 

The reason why there were two RAs per Regiment is that fewer wasn't enough... in any given term, you could expect 1/3+ of the Redarms to not be very active for at least a week or two. It happens to the best of us, and for legitimate reasons... but that way, whether announced or not, any inactivity is covered by the other from the Regiment. Not seeing it has to be that way... just that that is why there were 2, and not 1. We even experimented with 3 once because 2 didn't quite seem enough, though our overall activity was probably at least quadruple its current level at the time.

[Andrej]

I see what you're saying. But I think for now, with the current activity level, 1 per regiment would likely be best. How many active members do we have ATM? Like... 15?

[Andrej]

That's also why I mentioned that ACTIVE members should only be nominated for RAs. Obviously if the most active people are selected then maybe things will die down, but people that are moderately active and take part in most of the boards should be chosen so that they can assign the appropriate Spot Fines. I think it's a good way to promote activity, and also add more fun to the boards that is already present.

Edited February 2, 2013 by Andrej

[Andrej]

Like I stated before, I think it should be up to the CGs to appoint each RA within the regiments as far as enlisted men go. THEN, the CGs/other officers should nominate the other people they think deserves to hold the position of RAC and then allow the MG and other top 2 to decide. I understand your sentiment about the junior Brass being the NCOs in the Band, but perhaps that needs to change. I suggest making more enlisted ranks and bringing back the RLOs. The Brass should only make decisions and leave it up to the NCOs to ensure that it happens. I understand this, being a Sergeant in RL myself, and would be happy to play this role. Hell, if we decide to appoint SgtMaj in each regiment, and then ultimately elect one for Band itself I would be proud to take on that role. It's up to the MG though, along with the UC, but I feel like mine and Horn's input would be valuable if we want to set up the structure of the Band along military guidelines. SMB(Sergeant Major of the Band)how sweet would that be???!