Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2014 8:21:13 GMT
I would like to raise the question of making a slight adjustment to the Gentlemans Guidelines, didn't really know where to post.
First I just want to point out that this is merely a suggestion brought up for debate so people have an opportunity to speak their mind. If anyone have other issues regarding the Ethos they would like to discuss, this thread should be open for that as well. It's a good way to make sure the crew is able to adapt to the crew members, and not just the other way around. No decisions will be made here though, I suggest for the leadership that any decision-making based on debate/discussion here should be done in a seperate poll.
The issue I personally want to raise is that of killing crew members. The Ethos currently states that it should not happen unless you have been given the go-ahead by the other crew member, regardless of bounties and such. I would like to suggest adjusting it to allow killing a fellow crew member for a bounty under the circumstance where atleast 80% of the bounty is returned to the killed player through the Quick Menu > Inventory > Cash > Share From Last Job, and where the minimum amount the other player recieve should be $1000. (So if the bounty is $1000 you need to give 100% of the bounty)
The reason I want this to be allowed is simply efficiency. If players want to keep the bounty, it's usually to keep the money. However, having a bounty on you will keep you from getting new bounties, so it becomes a horribly inefficient way of getting money, as you need to survive for 48 minutes ingame to get it, at which point you might be in a random lobby and get killed by a random player. The way I see it, getting the cash instantly and having the ability to get a new bounty is only beneficial.
This would not apply during planned events of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cuz05 on Jun 5, 2014 9:28:21 GMT
Me and my bro always trade bounties straight away, we give 100% back. Amusingly, we met the other day with 3k on both our heads, no gifting necessary, lol.
I will occasionally ask someone if they want the bounty taken off. Normally cba to type it in chat.
I would just do it and return it but you never know if they actually want to keep it on for some reason. It may be a bad time to die for example, cars can end up in impound.
It's relatively small change when you divide it so I think any bounty claimed should be fully gifted back, its a lot simpler and clearer.
Given that a lot of people expect to be left alone and won't necessarily be aware of a change in policy, I think its best to ask 1st. We can certainly make a policy of doing that until it becomes widely understood that that's what will happen and people just naturally claim and return them.
|
|
|
|
Post by deejayb1874 on Jun 5, 2014 9:38:26 GMT
I'll always ask if someone wants their bounty gone, and always give 100%.
If you see me in FM with a bounty, and I point my gun at you, maybe shoot you in the foot, this means I want my bounty gone. I'd also like 100% ;o)
|
|
|
|
Post by nittydon on Jun 5, 2014 11:48:19 GMT
Isn't there awards for surviving bounties, not the $ but I mean in way of an achievement as such, I always try to survive mine to add to this count, if I am wrong by all means kill me and take all the cash ! , can make the max bounty $ just as quickly by selling a Balla !! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2014 11:49:13 GMT
Ask. It does'nt take long. Any crew member unexpectedly and deliberately poppin a cap in me, as you youngsters apparently say, for any reason in this game at all (apart from RRRef cos he's RRRef) in a FR crew session will be straight off of my Xmas card list and will forever become my enemy. Peace n out.  |
|
|
|
Post by Cuz05 on Jun 5, 2014 11:55:06 GMT
There is an award for surviving but I dunno if its a cumulative one. I got my survivor tat months ago so I think not.
|
|
|
|
Post by LuapYllier on Jun 5, 2014 12:52:12 GMT
If we are about to start an event I will usually ask if the person wants it cleared and give it back to them. Any other time I simply ignore it and help them defend themselves from anyone else not in crew tring to claim it.
Unless it is a GTA race or an event designed around killing for whatever reason I always have targetting priority set to low and can't shoot crew anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2014 17:55:36 GMT
I guess I'm just too old school. When I joined the crew I knew what was expected of me and I abide by those set of expectations. To just say that we need to change them because they don't meet someone's preferred playing style to me is silly. We all knew the rules going in and when we joined. We shouldn't change that to accommodate people after the fact. If Rockstar had made a change to the game that necessitated a change then fine; otherwise we leave the guidelines alone.
That being said, I don't care if someone kills me for the bounty if they do 2 things:
1) ask me if I want them to kill me to remove the bounty and I agree
2) give me 100% of the money (it's just 48 minutes otherwise-no big deal)
I would also kill another RRR member for the same reason if they asked me to do so.
To further explain my mentality on this subject...when it comes to GTA racing, I still will not kill RRR members unless it is a RRR session. When it is a random GTA event then to me all RRR members are off limits and we should do our best to help each other out. I just don't think it is best to open up the free to kill option, otherwise we are no different than the random FR sessions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 9:22:35 GMT
I guess I'm just too old school. When I joined the crew I knew what was expected of me and I abide by those set of expectations. To just say that we need to change them because they don't meet someone's preferred playing style to me is silly. We all knew the rules going in and when we joined. We shouldn't change that to accommodate people after the fact. If Rockstar had made a change to the game that necessitated a change then fine; otherwise we leave the guidelines alone. Please note the title and introduction to this post, the purpose is debate, not necessarily making any changes. If debate leads to a change in the guidelines then it was obviously a correct change as it was agreed upon, if not we have discussed the issue and reached a conclusion that the guidelines should still stand. This is considered a healthy approach to rules and guidelines in any community. We evolve by assessing our current state and if they are still relevant. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 13:23:47 GMT
I guess I'm just too old school. When I joined the crew I knew what was expected of me and I abide by those set of expectations. To just say that we need to change them because they don't meet someone's preferred playing style to me is silly. We all knew the rules going in and when we joined. We shouldn't change that to accommodate people after the fact. If Rockstar had made a change to the game that necessitated a change then fine; otherwise we leave the guidelines alone. Please note the title and introduction to this post, the purpose is debate, not necessarily making any changes. If debate leads to a change in the guidelines then it was obviously a correct change as it was agreed upon, if not we have discussed the issue and reached a conclusion that the guidelines should still stand. This is considered a healthy approach to rules and guidelines in any community. We evolve by assessing our current state and if they are still relevant. . What I posted was my opinion (part of the DEBATE) which is every bit as valid as any of your points. I still stand by my statements that to have a single person decide that they don't like the rules that they agreed to follow before joining the crew and then try to convince the group to change just so they can have their way is silly. I have lived on this earth for MANY years and do not need anyone explaining to me the pros and cons of debates or it's health merits. I was simply posting my opinion which YOU requested for us to do and then you attempt to lecture me when I disagree with your idea. The crew is built around respect for each other and I do not believe that I am being given that same respect that I gave you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 14:33:18 GMT
Totally with TF on this one. Altering the Ethos to allow unsolicited crew on crew killing just for the sake of a little virtual monetary garnering "efficiency" (i.e. one would not have to "waste" 10 seconds bothering to communicate with a crew member, just murder them as you would any other nomark random) sucks major balls on so many levels that I do not really believe it is up for debate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 15:19:34 GMT
The no kill rule has worked fine up to now.
There's no point making changes to the guidelines when people still die and claim/share bounties in our crew lobbys anyway, they only have to ask for it.
Having it so you can kill people to claim bounties will just lead to a few people setting them on everyone for an excuse to kill them when most members just want to mess about in FM without having to retrieve impounded cars all the time for the sake of 9k.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 16:21:32 GMT
Please note the title and introduction to this post, the purpose is debate, not necessarily making any changes. If debate leads to a change in the guidelines then it was obviously a correct change as it was agreed upon, if not we have discussed the issue and reached a conclusion that the guidelines should still stand. This is considered a healthy approach to rules and guidelines in any community. We evolve by assessing our current state and if they are still relevant. . What I posted was my opinion (part of the DEBATE) which is every bit as valid as any of your points. I still stand by my statements that to have a single person decide that they don't like the rules that they agreed to follow before joining the crew and then try to convince the group to change just so they can have their way is silly. I have lived on this earth for MANY years and do not need anyone explaining to me the pros and cons of debates or it's health merits. I was simply posting my opinion which YOU requested for us to do and then you attempt to lecture me when I disagree with your idea. The crew is built around respect for each other and I do not believe that I am being given that same respect that I gave you. Actually, what you seem to be doing the way I see it, both with your previous post and this one is to attack and undermine the purpose of having a debate in the first place. Again you are trying to put it as if I'm trying to hijack the crew in some way by demanding the rules guidelines to be changed, which is a very distorted picture. You come across as very hostile in your arguements, and most of them seem to be concerning the purpose of having a debate and not the subject of the debate (in this round). I am trying to open up a space where individuals are allowed to voice their opinion, nothing more, and in doing so I voiced my opinion, nothing more. I believe I am well within my rights to have an opinion and voice it without being attacked for doing so by someone else simply because they consider themselves senior to me. You are making some pretty big leaps in your assumptions regarding me here, and yet we have never spoken before. Perhaps you could've left out the personal attacks, atleast until you knew me better? And before you follow up with a defense about how you never adressed me personally in those accusations and you were "just voicing your opinion", just don't... There's no point rowing your boat further out to sea. Lets not make a bigger deal out of this then it really is, you jumped a little far in your conclusions, said some unthoughtful things and you might've wanted to rephrase a little or however you want to say it, but get over it, make the apology and lets both move on. It's not a big deal to me, and that's why I want this hostility to end before it even begins because somehow you've decided you don't like me, and you're trying to get in my throat. |
|
|
|
Post by LuapYllier on Jun 6, 2014 16:39:42 GMT
Whoa whoa damn...you guys are getting way heated for no reason Thunder you in my opinion jumped way harder than needed on this. Fachuro has as much right as anyone else to pose a question regarding guidelines and the responses have clearly deemed the current status quo to be satisfying...the rest of this mess was uncalled for. Having spoken with Fachuro a lot personally I can assure you that he is easily misunderstood and also easily compromizing.
I think some cooling off is appropriate here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 16:49:34 GMT
Stop wasting time on free roam and lets run some playlist god dammit!
On the topic : Some people might get it personal if you kill them so i'd leave the guidelines as they are.
No idea why would you make some trouble and get someone upset to get few dollars when you can run a playlist and get 130k+ with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by LuapYllier on Jun 6, 2014 16:58:25 GMT
One of the reasons the rules are the way they are is because the crew started on PS3 side. The available communications are different between the consoles. It is notalways as easy to let someone know why you just popped them in the melon...so avoiding the issue became the norm. It is much better to assume safety with family than to constantly question whether having a bounty among friends is going to be a problem.
As we can see by the posts above that even though everyone is crew not everyone is a familiar member of the family and you cant always know how an unfamiliar relative is going to respond to something. Even when I do get the urge to clear a bounty I always ask first and I always do it with people I know very well...never a new recruit or someone I dont see often.
The guideline will stay as it is but thanks for bringing it up Fachuro. If nothing else it reaffirms the need for said guideline.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cuz05 on Jun 6, 2014 17:05:07 GMT
I don't really see much of a problem with Thunders 1st post tbh. He's questioning the need to consider changes to the guidelines, given that they're well founded and pretty liberal, I think that's fair enough. The crew was founded on certain principals and I don't see anything arising that would conflict with them. It's important to all of us that we remain faithful to those principals and the guidelines are there to reflect the crew philosophy. That said, there's nobody here that wishes to stand in the way of debate. Following that 1st post of Thunders, I think you both overreacted. I know that you are both reasonable and intelligent people, I would not expect either of you to bear any ill will over this once you are more familiar with each other. Anyway, this is good healthy stuff. It's important we care enough to have our views and that we stand by them. Peace out  |
|
|
|
Post by LuapYllier on Jun 6, 2014 17:37:28 GMT
Thunders first paragraph, the same one Fachuro quoted, could be interpreted as "You knew the rules when you joined, if you didnt like them you shouldnt expect us to change just because of you and what you want." Which would be a harsh way to say hello if you were on the recieving end. Anything after that was just escalation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cuz05 on Jun 6, 2014 17:44:46 GMT
Thunders first paragraph, the same one Fachuro quoted, could be interpreted as "You knew the rules when you joined, if you didnt like them you shouldnt expect us to change just because of you and what you want." Which would be a harsh way to say hello if you were on the recieving end. Anything after that was just escalation. Well it could be, I agree, but I still think it's a fair point. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 18:51:31 GMT
Thunders first paragraph, the same one Fachuro quoted, could be interpreted as "You knew the rules when you joined, if you didnt like them you shouldnt expect us to change just because of you and what you want." Which would be a harsh way to say hello if you were on the recieving end. Anything after that was just escalation. I was simply stating a fact. The guidelines have served us well and don't need to be changed on a whim unless a situation merits that they be changed. An organization needs consistency and that is all I was saying. The mere fact that I'm being jumped on and accused of all sorts of things from stifling debate, being high and mighty, closed minded, and so on is just too much. I never said anything to illicit the responses I'm getting from both you or fachuro. I am not angry about his or any one's opinions but I haven't done anything that I'm being accused of and that does make me angry. fachuro comes at me with telling me I need to re-read the title and then acting like the parent of a young child when he explained the merits of debate is not hostile? REALLY!?!?! All I did was express my opinions and thoughts just as everyone should have and I'm the one being crucified here. I understand that you don't know me and that I'm on the PS3 side of things but to just go off and accuse me of being hostile while backing your boy when he is the one making personal accusations about me is not cool. To review: I have not ever stated or implied that I thought that anyone of any crew rank, or gaming console, or any nationality, or religion, or sexual orientation, etc had less of a right to an opinion or to make a post on this forum or any other forum. I have not ever stated that anyone was of less intelligence or that I was of superior intelligence to any one. I have not ever claimed to be judge, jury,or executioner of any idea, post or thought on this or any other forum. I have not ever claimed to be a better person that anybody else on this forum or any other venue. I have not ever made a personal attack against anyone here for any reason. I hate that this post has become an attack thunderfiend post. I merely stated my opinion within the forum guidelines and for that I'm being attacked while the OP is allowed to make all sorts of accusations and assumptions against me without as much as a peep about him being incorrect or going too far in his replies to me. I've not said anything that merits an apology so for those thinking that I need to offer one please don't hold your breath as it will not be coming. I will be the first to apologize when I have done something wrong. Anyone on the PS3 side can (and I bet would) say that I am not this evil, power hungry, inconsiderate person that you and fachuro are making me out to be. I am always the one who welcomes anyone in everything we do and I always represent RRR with the utmost professionalism. I hate that "family business" has been posted for all of the world to see but I have to speak up and defend my integrity and honor as I have come under unfair and unwarranted attacks. Even after all of this, I have no ill feelings about anyone in this crew on either console. I just wish that the same could be said for people's feelings about me. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 19:53:17 GMT
I have no ill feelings about anyone in this crew on either console. I just wish that the same could be said for people's feelings about me. I love ya homie  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 21:07:14 GMT
I have no ill feelings about anyone in this crew on either console. I just wish that the same could be said for people's feelings about me. I love ya homie Thanks Swifty!! |
|
|
|
Post by LuapYllier on Jun 6, 2014 22:47:33 GMT
Thunder, now your going over the top with me too? I never said any of those things.
First off starting a discussion about the subject in no way indicates any changes would be made on a whim. In fact it is the opposite.
I was not defending Fachuro...he said plenty wrong...but it was in response to your post which was a catalyst.
Several others commented on how they felt about the idea and your opinion on the matter is equally noted as well. It was something about the way you said "To just say that we need to change them because they don't meet someone's preferred playing style to me is silly" set him on defense and he pointed out that he wasn't asking for change, he was asking for debate. Then he went too far defending. Then you took offence at his wording and it all rolled downhill from there. This whole thing boils down to miscommunication.
Fachuro. there are no children in this crew that I am aware of. Unlike what you might have dealt with in MAIN or how you might encounter people in GTAF who are of limited intellect and often need to be taught some things, no one here needs any lessons on life. It was completely unnecessary to respond the way you did. Thunders comment, while I also felt a tinge of "smack" when I read it the first time, wasn't nearly worthy of starting a mental brawl over.
I am done with this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cuz05 on Jun 7, 2014 1:11:31 GMT
Good post Luap  |
|
