Skwisgaar_Skwigelf I was on board with your jam until the head-banging hoes showed up. They were quite the distraction and I feel took a lot of attention off your main point. Possibly even negating it, but who I am to speak for anyone else. 

Your suggestion of starting ones own  group is all fine and dandy as long as you remember the basic social layout we have which is the in-group/ out- group. Even if people make their own band of men and women they still have to get into the in-group to make it anywhere. This is just basic natural order  of the way society works. It doesn't  matter which society this is the way it works. 

I have had some thoughts about the possibility of instituting some form of 'universal' rules, or rather guidelines, concerning the authorisation of new Leaders. However, I think this is impractical (at best) for a number of reasons. If you'll allow me, I'll briefly go through my thoughts on this matter. 

(This has to be all universal and be fluid through any regime)

I think this in itself would be a significant hurdle. New traditions (which this aims to be) are hard to institute, unless they're convenient, popular or otherwise attractive to those in power. I can imagine that, if a new regime comes to prominence after the demise of the previous one, their immediate concern is not necessarily to preserve the rules or codes of conduct that that preceding regime has instituted. But it could happen. However, it does seem somewhat logical to me that, after a major war or some kind of cataclysmic event that has shaken up the world, it must be tremendously tempting to ignore or 'freeze' these rules, just out of sheer practicality. Rebuilding is a pain, and if you want to do it quickly I can imagine there is not a great deal of desire for a set of arbitrary (and relatively new-fangled) rules to restrict and bottle-neck the pace of your rebuilding. Furthermore, it seems probable that the 'universality' of these rules might come into doubt; unless all Leaders collectively agree to enforce them across all cities. All in all, it is doubtful that it would actually last. After all, even if you flout the rules temporarily for the purposes of rebuilding this thing of ours, what specific advantage is there to return to them?

1. Make a minimum age to be placed in a authorized position , maybe 10 days, this way the person is at least a Made man.  ( bringing some actual respect back to the position.)

To be frank, this seems fairly self-evident to me. In conjunction with the 'laws' laid down by those in City Hall, those the Gods have appointed to rule over us, it is doubtful that the proliferation of under-Made Leaders will ever be a serious threat to the integrity and dignity of this thing of ours.

2. Only those bloodlines who were killed during service and the crew they served is still standing can be authorized to this position as an under Made. 

Okay? I guess. Quite the eventuality. 

3. Come up with some universal guideline for authorizing people, so the old bloodlines have a protocol to go by and  to give the new bloodlines the same opportunity of begin authorized.  Add some guideline of a bloodline can only be  authorized so many times with a certain amount of time. This make it easier to cycle through the families that would like to be authorized. 

Any suggestions? If we are bold enough to suggest the imposition of such a system, then surely it would be opportune to have a somewhat detailed and fleshed-out proposal at the ready? It seems somewhat foolish to expect that those in power will a) Accept the proposal of universal rules and b) devise them, prompted by a single soapbox speech. At least, I wouldn't feel particularly inclined, if it wasn't of my own volition (had I dreamed it up myself!).

Finally, I am more than doubtful if it will actually result in any meaningful change. The recurring authorisation of select bloodlines seems to be due to a small number of quite convincing reasons — i.e. the ability to earn and build quickly (experience), the familiarity and trust that exists between old bloodlines (or sometimes, the exact opposite!). Give these people a set of guidelines, and they will still fulfill them, on average, must faster than the nearest 'noob'.  

Indifference shrugged.

”We don’t need a universal guideline for authorization. As mobsters, we have the right to choose who we support (and who we don’t) through our donations, our words, and our guns. Making a policy is just way too rigid in my opinion. Do I care if there’s nepotism? No, not really. Live and let live. If I don’t want to be a part of it - I don’t have to. It’s pretty simple.”

Spring had been listening for a little while. Slowly she mulled over her thoughts before contributing the conversation at hand.

"Simply put, find a city or a leader that shares the same values as you do, and then bust your behind off like never before. If you can't find one, bide your time because it'll happen eventually.

There really is no need for universal anything. Each person has their own way of conducting business and will continue to do what works for them."

MarkAntony I find this reason faulty at best, for example look at the city rules and this years war about mugging.  Or look at the city rules ( just a few months past) and see where people had to declare that they did not support rape. This was done quite quickly and was accepted across the board with nearly little push back.   If you flout rules only when they are convenient for you what use are any them? May as well get rid of every rule then with that reasoning.  Rules are not supposed to  be convenient they are  there to make a somewhat harmonious community that can function. Under made  as upper structure is a threat to integrity of this thing of ours, I do apologize that you can not see how this a threat to integrity. It shows other people you don't have to work you just have to lick someones boot or shine them either way it negates the work put into and makes the uppers hypocrites by putting someone in that position with no prior work, while telling the rest of  us to work for it.  Hmm, I suppose it a foolish act to start an idea and see what others think of it or what others may have to add to it. Many perspectives after all can help you see some part of the picture you never realized was there. 

Indifference my suggestion has nothing to do with telling people who they may or not not join. Please go back and read the original post to comprehend what is being said ,instead of  just making a comment just to respond.

Spring You like many others think this some post of me looking for people for or asking how to find people to be with. That is not the case. My bloodline will do as  it has always done. Create these connections on their own  and not  feel self entitled due to  mommy or daddy's  past merit.

NOTE: The intention of the original  post was to put an example out there of a topic that people usually get rambunctious about.  That people often have been shot over in the past for even mentioning . And to show a decent conversation can be held with out people getting shot.  It is not the topic it is how you interact. 

Please do not assume my intentions. As that was not what I thought at all of you. Not even for a split second.

I agree with you. People should earn their places in our upper structures, but I am not naive to believe that the other tactic will never be used. Finding a leader that shares the same values that you do, is so much easier when you are looking for these qualities. That was all I was merely saying.

RosaliaOrazia - that would be my suggestion in place of disagreeing with your call for standardized rules on how to authorize (which is just plain silly if we're gonna just call it what it is). No need to reinvent the wheel.  You see, proper discourse (to me) involves suggestions if you're going to disagree with someone's point of view - not just pointing to what was already said and suggesting it's the gospel and everyone needs to fall in line and drink the purple Kool-aid.

That said - I don't think I need to hear any more of your drivel.  I'm not going to go back and read your post.  I'd probably just cringe again, to be honest.  I've got better things to do with myself that. 

Have fun isolating yourself!!  Cheers

Indifference if you have better things  to do than why did you even waste your time to tell me you  have better things to do. Seems you would have been doing those better things. 

Shrugs her shoulders But what  do I know, I am just a dumb kid right?

I hate to say it but that very act of doing so is rather antagonistic, quite juvenile, and is dripping with insecurity.

And here I thought I was the youngest in thee streets. Looks through the crowd to see if there are any other young youth. 

Spring Likewise to you and others responding to this post. You all are assuming something in your responses, and that is that I am looking for advice.   You show it by calling it naive, and then continue by giving me very specific advise on how to do something.

This wasn't for advice.  This was to have a discussion on a topic. 

I may be young and have plenty to learn, but  at least I can see the difference between a discussion and someone asking advice. 

This whole thing is laughable.  You asked a question (Which you ended with a period, not a question mark - several times - but I digress) and then you literally argue with everyone who comes in and offers comment.  This isn't even healthy discussion/debate/whatever you have this framed as in your mind.  This is trolling.  It's probably because no one agrees with you and you continue to stereotype respected mobsters based on your own accusatory and false perceptions.  But - I continue to rack up money and credit for showing up here, so I guess there's not much point in walking away!  Even if I want to - it's obvious that I'm loved here, so I guess I'll give you some more.

It was just my opinion that we don't need socialism in the mafia.  "Let's make universal guidelines which are fluid over regimes" in the Criminal Underworld?  Seriously?  Come on.

Antagonistic?  deserved.  Juvenile?  maybe.  Insecure?  Sure.  Quaking in my boots.  

Live and let live, my dear.  Everyone else isn't the problem here.  

@ Indifference

Okay so discussion is arguing?  That is a new to me.   

And you do realize to come in here and first pick on my punctuation or grammar just shows how weak your attacks are. I mean really you are trying to show how indifferent you  to me are yet here you are and the first thing you get on me about is my punctuation and grammar. Very weak weak argument indeed. 

It makes we wonder what you are really mad at  me about. Since I haven't personally met you .
 It must be something one of my ancestors did, again weak if this is the case.  You should not let anyone control your emotions like that.  I will pray for you. 

Now if you really were indifferent to me and what I have to say, you would not be here attacking my grammar and punctuation. 

I think you are a little stressed and that is making you a bit high strung maybe get a pet I hear they help that kind of stress. 

May the Saints bless you. 

This is, as you have pointed out, an argument as old as time or, well, me.

Whilst nepotism is a horrible thing, it isn't surprising, especially in this thing of ours where we check our backs for knives every 5 minutes.

As much as i'd love things to change, I can understand those authorising do so in the knowledge that they know and trust those they authorise, makes sense.

I've said it before and I'll say again, I would like to see, just once, an amnesty on people setting up.  No auth whatsoever, just let the strongest survive.

I hold the firm belief that the cream will always rise to the top, which is why my line hasn't run a family for nearly 18 years.

@ZeebedeeMcZebFace  Thank you for your part in this discussion. 

Now as for those who keep looking for the knife in their backs. I may be a naive youth but  I wonder a couple things. Such as why is  it they are looking for these knives? What did they do to make themselves feel they needed to check for these knives? Are these serrated knives? 

Yes, trust is where the in-group/ out-group  comes from.   I think many of you think I am tearing this apart, but I am in reality just pointing out how socializing works. 

If all you see is me pleading for some position of power.  Or pleading on tips on how to do this ..Shakes her head and laughs.  Well then you never knew me or my bloodline. 

Zeb I need to add that your lack of self confidence is disturbing to me.
You really should think of yourself as cream. Everyone should.

So don't use your lack of self confidence as a  reason why your line has  not run a family in 18 years. 

Indifference laughs heartily at Rosalia as he just shakes his head.  

"News dear.  It's news, not new.  News.    And, this started as a discussion - but it developed into arguing as everyone here watches you name call, accuse and burn bridges.  Personally, I have no clue if our lines have crossed before.  Never even really thought about it or cared, to be honest.  It's what's most likely, but it doesn't really figure into the reason why I might seem a little cantankerous to you. That mostly has to do with your waning social intelligence and trolly nature, which is probably the real reason you don't get an authorization as opposed to this nepotism thing you were talking about...

But - let's keep the money and creds and trolling and accusations going rolling, Sweetie Pie.  I'll be here all week! Cheers!"

Indifference 

I so apologize but I laugh to myself every time I see you come to this street corner. 

Only because you said this to start with 

That said - I don't think I need to hear any more of your drivel.  I'm not going to go back and read your post.  I'd probably just cringe again, to be honest.  I've got better things to do with myself that. 

 You can keep brow beating me on my own street corner all you want, taking my original post and it's intent out of context all you want.So my dear let me show  you what indifference really looks like.

The young girl skips of whistling Jimi Crackcorn and I don't care. Forgetting about the indifferent person that doesn't know how to practice indifference, because she has better things to do.

RosaliaOrazia

I didn't for one moment suggest you were pleading for power or tearing something apart, whatever that something maybe, nor would I make judgements about you as, I'm not sure who you're line is/are/were. 

The self-righteous scream judgments against others to hide the noise of skeletons dancing in their own closets

As for the rest, I use that as an excuse for laziness, my line was always slovenly as fuck.

ZebedeeMcZebFace

Maybe I misinterpreted  what you said.  I am still just a teen learning how to do this adult type communication. 

I don't think anyone should hide their skeletons in a closet or anywhere else for that matter. If they hide their skeletons then those skeletons come back to haunt them. Especially if the coppers find the skeletons, that is bad for business.

Thank you for clearing that part up I was worried you had low self esteem. I am happy to hear that is just due to laziness.

This is very true

Skeletons are the absolute worst.  

I know some people say the represent the finality of death, I just think they look like gurning lickspittles.

also, wear pants!

Indifference watches her skip off and does a little fistpump to himself.

"Things change, and I changed my mind as I alluded to in the next few pieces of communication I sent.  But - I guess if you want to go back to the start and select the text that fits your twisted conjecture..."

Indifference shrugs his shoulders.

 "You do you, dear!!  I'm sure you'll go places!!" 

"Now run along and be indifferent, I'll be here all week collecting!!  Cheers!!"