[snip]

Just wanted to bump this post for anyone new and reading this board again

As a 2nd part of our earlier discussion of club member engagement as Louis and I call it we want to expand some on what this means. As originally outlined in our 2nd HQ post here (https://www.star-fleet.com/core/command/election/notes/31916/) we want to encourage all members to participate in an open forum of discussion and ideas for events. Whether that is in a tabletop Trek live roleplay in discord, or by frank FAQ posts or discussions in the end we want to ensure that all members have as much chance for a voice and personal activities, as the more regular voices which we commonly hear from in the club.

To that end the 2nd part of Engagement is the common theme of mentoring. To Louis and I mentoring is just as an important part of this club’s structure as simply roleplaying. Without training new minds to positions higher up then CO, XO, etc the club could stagnant when older hats don’t take up such positions or retire from the club. To this end Louis and I would take a closer eyed view of how FComms and Cabinet directors are doing things to train where possible and look at the efficiency of a department or fleet to see if stream lining anything could be done.

Now what does that mean exactly is open to debate and discussions. To some in the past it has meant the cutting of ships or merging of fleets sometimes often when it is most needed. An arguement I think could be made that some unhealthy ships could be looked at and if not turned around trimmed down or had poor performing crew replaced. Conversely I think an argument could be made that more variety in the fleet cultures on ships could also be looked at by creative minded GMs/CO/Crew etc. Whether this means new ships or not again would be up for debate, especially now that we have a new GM exam up and running with, from what I hear, new people taking said exam. In addition some departments in how they are structured or ran could be looked at for updating. This is nothing of course that we would force on anyone in our term if elected, only bring up when questioning and engaging interested parties.

Robert Archer & Louis Harvatt (Keeping It Stupidly Simple)