Faction "Continuation" and its Contrary Effect

[Goonbag]

Just because OOC leadership have grown tired of a project doesn't mean that the other 20 people in the faction have.

 

You shouldn't have left your homies in the lurch.

[remainlowkey]

Certain you haven't even read what is being discussed here, don't bother responding if you're gonna blabber crap.

 

Quote

I don't think I have any right as an original Vago to tell anyone doing them now that they can't because I don't like them, or whatever. 

It's meant for faction leaders and I'm pretty sure you weren't in that postion to have the right to say so.

Edited January 24, 2022 by OddSchool

[Ted]

1 hour ago, OddSchool said:

It's meant for faction leaders and I'm pretty sure you weren't in that postion to have the right to say so.

In that case, I demand you remove Matty Boy from your PFP. 

Edited January 24, 2022 by Ted

[Chuckles]

In future I'll make a dummies guide to continuation specifically for him. This has nothing to do with leadership of a faction acting in bad faith or its members being "left in the lurch," it's to do with an obvious drop in quality when the leadership of a faction notice the deterioration of said quality and decide to end the project, only for it to be resurrected days, weeks and even months later while maintaining its standing. Not everyone is capable of being a leader and more importantly, not everyone is capable of successfully portraying a concept. Whilst the purpose behind these "carry on" factions might prolong a faction's lifespan, it damages its quality.

 

I have no issues with people continuing their characters or factions for that matter if it is adequate, but being a "member" should not entitle you to continue someone else's project if they feel that it's beyond salvage. I might have to dumb it down a bit so that people like the above stop taking it at face value, or maybe I should add more cunts, mates and sheilas in so that it's more understandable to the blockheads. The truth of the matter is that faction leaders know their factions more than anyone. If they are closing the faction free willingly, it's because it's out served its purpose.

 

I shouldn't be able to, as a member of a faction, be able to contact a few of my OOC buddies (who were never part of the faction) and continue a faction most of them, bar myself, were never part of. It becomes a brand new faction with brand new members and it should have to go through the same process as any other new faction. If leaders don't trust somebody to carry on their faction, the chances are it's for good reason. I don't see why an application should change that.  All it takes is one look into the archive section to know that these "continuations" are harmful to the quality of roleplay.

 

It's not about members wanting continuum, if they're capable and if they have the following of the faction or the backing of the people who made the faction successful in the first place. I speak for at least three people that wanted to close their factions but weren't able to. The "fun" and abandonment of members should never come before quality of roleplay and this is why we're seeing an obvious decline in it. Continuation is okay if it's passed down but the deterioration of said factions comes from these "enforced" resumptions. I believe that allowing this is part and parcel the reason why the condition of these recycled factions are so bad.

 

But I get that people like shortcuts. 

 

A faction leader isn't just a "thread holder," they're the glue that held the faction together, gave it its direction and the person who ensured its quality. Which is why I'm saying that it's become more of a case of staying alive than it has being contributory to the server.

 

Dumbed down for the above:

 

Man notice faction decline. Man notice inactive. Man close faction. Man notice 2 weeks later faction back from dead with new leader and new members. Man think dog shit. Man think let sleeping dogs lay.

 

 

[Wuhtah]

Locked per OP's request.