| outrageous idea | |
|
|
Author | Message |
---|
Beelzebub[W] Officer
Posts : 121 Join date : 2009-05-14 Age : 29 Location : Bethesda, MD
| Subject: outrageous idea Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:48 pm | |
| i called this topic outrageous idea because i know it will not be accepted. but i felt like sharing it anyway. ok so here goes. i was wondering if we could have 2 new divisions added to te clan. seeing as how we already have a main division i was wondering if we could add an air force and navy division, to make our clan stand out even more from the others and to have new ranks added. i know this idea wont be accepted but if it would be accept, it could open new doors and could expand to new oppertunities for on comming leaders. this would have new ranks, with the same equivalent. but it would open more spots for leaders to assume. i just thought of this too, maybe we could have regiments in addition to squads to further our differences to other clans. we would become a virtual army without the akward dying and fighting parts. all i would need to make this project come to life is 2 additional rank pages, which i can fill out the ranks if i am given permission. This would increase diversity ammong our clan.
i would be willing, despite my hatred for high ranks, to assume a high rank in one of those two (hopefully) new divisions to help get them started. i would also take care of recruiting for this division as well as do administrative work, suggest the rankings and take responsibility over the division until someone capable of assuming a high rank assumes it. then i would move to assist that person or assist with the second additional division.
if anyone would be willing to help me accomplish this project (if it is accepted), it would be a tremendous help. i have already made the ranks, all i would need is people to fill in the ranks and to recruit.
please consider and Telephant, if you do not accept, dont bash me too hard for this please? after all, its only a suggestion to make this clan more interesting and to challenge the leadership, support and dedication of this clan. however, if it is accepted, i will take full responsibility for the project, failure or success.
Last edited by Beelzebub[W] on Sun Jul 12, 2009 3:30 am; edited 4 times in total | |
|
| |
Mr.Fail Warrant Officer
Posts : 53 Join date : 2009-07-10 Location : Masachussetts
| Subject: Re: outrageous idea Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:51 pm | |
| RoflCOPTER Why not make it sound more legit like ,
Government Division 1 Army Division 2 Air Force Division 3 Navy
I agree to this addon, for it gives people choices of what division they want to be in. | |
|
| |
Relentless[W] Recruit
Posts : 7 Join date : 2009-06-19 Age : 35
| Subject: Re: outrageous idea Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:51 am | |
| Its a good idea but Tele has to like it lol | |
|
| |
Beelzebub[W] Officer
Posts : 121 Join date : 2009-05-14 Age : 29 Location : Bethesda, MD
| Subject: Re: outrageous idea Sun Jul 12, 2009 3:04 am | |
| he is the one that will decide the faith of this project. | |
|
| |
Mr.Fail Warrant Officer
Posts : 53 Join date : 2009-07-10 Location : Masachussetts
| Subject: Re: outrageous idea Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:11 am | |
| Very true. Thing is hes Offline more than hes Online, so we cant really do shit xD | |
|
| |
DarKnight[W] Recruit
Posts : 8 Join date : 2009-07-08 Age : 35 Location : Cincinnati, OH
| Subject: Re: outrageous idea Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:28 am | |
| Good creativity, and it may seem like a good idea in thought, but I don't see any advantages in having three separate ranking trees(please explain if there is more to it). As of right now, there are not enough active members to even fill three sets of ranks. What it will do in the long run is separate loyalty, communication, and organization. When you put that in terms of a much larger clan, its even more dangerous. With a third of the clan(and that can be a large number at this point) essentially looking up to a different leader, loyalty changes whether its meaningful or not. In a larger clan, there is much more competition for higher ranks, and so its not necessary to make sure everyone is perfectly happy with their rank, it creates more motivation in the long run.
You may argue that the leaders of these rankings still will answer to tele, and that may be true, but you need to remember the people of those rankings will be answering to the leader of their particular ranking, from how I understand it at least. If this isn't the case, the separate rankings would have no power, and therefore be worthless anyways. With the people answering only to their respective leader, its like three separate clans, or at least the dangerous possibility. If your looking for more organization, communication and/or leadership, you should be looking to the generals.
Feel free to disagree or question me, thats my two cents. | |
|
| |
Mr.Fail Warrant Officer
Posts : 53 Join date : 2009-07-10 Location : Masachussetts
| Subject: Re: outrageous idea Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:48 am | |
| The guy above me, made the perfect arguement that like not a lot can beat. I have to admit that he i rite -_- | |
|
| |
Beelzebub[W] Officer
Posts : 121 Join date : 2009-05-14 Age : 29 Location : Bethesda, MD
| Subject: Re: outrageous idea Sun Jul 12, 2009 12:08 pm | |
| My idea was that every division has to answer to ANYONE higher ranking then them, so if a Major General in the Air Force needs something done, he can ask a someone lower ranking then him, like a Captain (equivalent to a Colonel) in the navy to do it. But every division would still have to answer to the advisory staff and the executive staff. All my idea would do is open eight more general positions and twelve more officer positions. And as you requested, here are the ranks i have worked out, along with their current UWR equivalent.
Air Force: (Lowest To Highest) Equvalent to Current UWR Army ranks ENLISTED
Airman Basic = Recruit
Airman = Private
Airman First Class = Private First Class
Senior Airman = Corporal
Staff Sergeant = Sergeant
Technical Sergeant = Staff Sergeant
Master Sergeant = Gunnery Sergeant
Senior Master Sergeant = Master Sergeant
Chief Master Sergeant = First Sergeant
Command Chief Master Sergeant = Sergeant Major
WARRANT OFFICERS
Same as current UWR WO ranks
OFFICERS
Same as current UWR officer ranks
GENERALS
Same as current UWR general ranks
Navy: (lowest to Highest) Equivalent to Current UWR Army ranks ENLISTED
Seaman Recruit = Recruit
Seaman = Private
Petty Officer Third Class = Corporal
Petty Officer Second Class = Sergeant
Petty Officer First Class = Staff Sergeant
Chief Petty Officer = Gunnery Sergeant
Senior Chief Petty Officer = MAster Sergeant
Master Chief Petty Officer = First Sergeant
Command Master Chief Petty Officer = Sergeant Major
WARRANT OFFICERS
Fleet Master Chief Petty Officer = Warrant Officer W1
Chief Warrant Officer W2 = Warrant Officer W2
Chief Warrant Officer W3 = Warrant Officer W3
Chief Warrant Officer W4 = Chief Warrant Officer W4
Chief Warrant Officer W5 = Chief Warrant Officer W5
OFFICERS
Ensign = Second Lieutenant
Junior Lieutenant = First Lieutenant
Lieutenant = Captain
Lieutenant Commander = Major
Commander = Lieutenant Colonel
Captain = Colonel
GENERALS
Rear Admiral (Lower Half) = Brigadier General
Rear Admiral (Uper Half) = Major General
Vice Admiral = Lieutenant General
Admiral = General | |
|
| |
Mr.Fail Warrant Officer
Posts : 53 Join date : 2009-07-10 Location : Masachussetts
| Subject: Re: outrageous idea Sun Jul 12, 2009 12:25 pm | |
| I like your idea but I think that we should wait till we got more members | |
|
| |
Beelzebub[W] Officer
Posts : 121 Join date : 2009-05-14 Age : 29 Location : Bethesda, MD
| Subject: Re: outrageous idea Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:13 pm | |
| still no response... The suspense is driving me up a fucking wall... | |
|
| |
Telephant[W] Admin
Posts : 75 Join date : 2009-05-04 Age : 33 Location : Jersey
| Subject: Re: outrageous idea Sun Jul 12, 2009 3:15 pm | |
| It doesn't benefit the clan. It just adds more ranks -- ranks that make UWR seem like other clans.
Unnecessary. But creativity is important. Focus it on something else though. | |
|
| |
Sponsored content
| Subject: Re: outrageous idea | |
| |
|
| |
| outrageous idea | |
|