Feedback on supplier apps would be a great addition to transparency. I understand that you guys are inundated with applications and don’t have time to write detailed feedback on every application - but even access to the logs of IFMs discussion of the app would probably suffice. For factions that have been around for a while and applied multiple times for a major supplier role to no avail it can be disheartening not to know where you’ve gone wrong/what you need to improve. Especially knowing it could be another 12 months before those applications open again. Something as simple as - your application was denied because there are already too many suppliers in your field of roleplay with that supplier status, would suffice. This would stop factions holding out for that elusive major gun supplier role when they’re realistically never going to get it due to over saturation, regardless of how good/bad their application is. Given that you can only have one major supplier role, these factions may be unknowingly shooting themselves in the foot by holding out for gun supplier, which they will unknowingly never get, when they could’ve applied for drug supplier instead. I don’t know if I’m speaking for the majority of people here, or if it’s only my faction in this boat, but this situation has lead to our faction (18 months old, biggest faction in our “scene” with over 60 /invited members) having zero major supplier role. Granted, IFM has been very accommodating with other types of schemes, and we’ve done quite well as middle men and we have never been short on roleplay, but I feel like we could have potentially missed out on other opportunities that a bit transparency around supplier apps could have opened up to us. OR we haven’t missed out at all, and our applications have just been trash, which feedback could have also explained.