This is an interesting conversation you've brought up here, Mxyz. You seem to like a bit of controversy around you all the time. That's both somewhat honorable and, at the same time, it is really, really fucking confusing.

What was even the point of this ramble? You hopped out into the streets again to start telling people what most of them already know. Omertà is plunged into the eyes of every single person who aligns themselves with a family, and those who shatter it pay dearly. Bodyguard funds logically should help to better your crew leader, but there are some people who's lines have made them the richest ones around. Why not gather some protection for themselves just as well as they can for their leader?

Thirdly, chain of command, yadda yadda. Easily agreeable; one should not ask for a promotion or how to obtain it; just sit back and continue working. One can definitely ask ways they can help, however, and treating your leaders like good friends over monetary assets are the key to true success. Especially when it comes to following direct orders; no questions, only doing. We all want results, and we would like them fast.

Now comes why this oration of yours irritates me.

Ethics and etiquette have fallen off this world? In some ways, maybe, but all I see is a thriving community. We have multiple Godfathers spread out across nearly all cities, and plenty of people who have survived well over 200 days of this thing of ours. That is commendable on all sides. The regimes changed, and cities, from what I can make out, have found a good way to avoid constant wars between each other every damn week. That's huge. There's some hiccups here and there--there always will be--but for the most part, the world is stable.

Secondly, you talk about not discussing your rank or your "place in society", and that you should know it prior to begin with. That's all fine and dandy, and you've chosen to present that as your role of consigliere in the Big Apple. What bothers me is that you've directed this entirely towards yourself, and you've somehow felt obligated to tell us all how we should run ourselves, but specifically, in your vision.

Why put so much effort towards making this about you? There isn't even any room for questioning in your entire lecture; it's all full of "you", "your" and rhetorical questions. It just feels so...egotistical.

This is not a personal attack, this is just me explaining how your presentation might come off as dim-witted.

Furthermore, you state you are not "advocating for change". Sorry, what? Wasn't it around a few weeks ago you came out of nowhere berating Los Angeles to "get better standards" and find some "real leadership"? You can't possibly come out saying that and then throw up this speech that just further looks to glorify yourself. I also remember that discussion also opening with you stating you are a "nobody" with your only viable weapon being your voice. Maybe I wasn't around to see you rise up to the powerful position you are in now, but if your status has not changed, you cannot just shove yourself off to the side saying you have "no authority" then prepare this entire disquisition that literally opens with "I am the 12th strongest consigliere in this world" and expect to be taken seriously. No, telling people across the world what to do is not a requirement to show the "bark of your bite". You could instead stick to actual discussion-based meetings looking for ways to improve, instead of just handing out an etiquette list telling people how they should act.

Lastly, you ended this conversation with a question towards the strictness of our organizations, suggesting that, rhetorically mind you, that it should be "stricter". You could probably defend this as a way to have people suggest more etiquette-based rules, but, as did your LA rant a few weeks back, this again just seems like an excuse to start replacing or wiping out cities. Should they be more strict? Really, I say no. If they weren't strict already, we'd have a lot more random killings on the streets of associates or made members, The fact we have a decent semblance of world authority regarding multiple Godfathers across the cities helps prove that.

In conclusion, again, this is not a personal attack. I am bringing light to the fact that this call of a "return to tradition" seems more like a hole-filled rant telling people what they already know. You cannot ask questions of which you know the answer to already, and you certainly cannot make claims of avoidance then immediately go on to suggest the things you said you would stay clear of. I'm all for improvements and change for good, but this is not how to achieve it.

I will address the body guard  issue you have. I believe you have forgotten how the bodyguards work, as there was not to long a ago change to their training and usefulness. 

That would be the advancement of their defense to the Crew leader thorough the loyalty option.

Now I may be mistaken but I believe when you choose to be completely loyal all your working bodyguards go to  the defense of the Crew Leader. 

So with this new addition to their ability and skills I believe that is completely valid for any criminal in a crew to have body guards regardless of their rank.  

Ah, you don't give a fuck, per-say? Alright, glad to know we're on the same terms; I could care less about you calling me delusional or offended or soft. I'll just stick to what I'm here for, like a good little noodle, and keep it as that.

What confuses me here is that this is all an opinion? Something that drives up conversation and ideas? I'm not even going to bother rebutting that. I guess all the "You will", "Do not", "Don't ever", "For you", "Did you" clauses formulate into opinions...without any feelings or background thought into them. I think those are not opinions. Do you think those are opinions?

Instead of defending myself, I'll instead confirm that yes, I was offended, because the entirety of this is unnecessary, hypocritical, and just...stupid, for a lack of a better word. It's more nonsense about telling others how they should act, and it is clearly directed at all of us, the audience. And with your specific term-usage, the only signals I'm getting is that this is all designed to improve our organizations to your liking.

Wise Guys are a tricky issue; for the most part, I am fine if they sink with their boats, especially if there is knowledge beforehand they are scheduled to become Made soon, are holding off so they can complete personal goals, or have been rapidly training. It all depends on how protection orders run and what specifics leaders want. Some should be left to find new families, maybe some shouldn't. I'm not one to decide.

If people truly ARE asking for promotions more often, that's not very good. Shame on them. But what can we do about it? Easy methods involve murder, and lengthy methods aren't worth the time. Not saying it should be allowed; if you go and ask for promotions, in my opinion, you should be demoted, or denied Made, as long as one's leader allows. It's a clingy subject, and no way is the best way.

The bodyguard discussion is actually interesting, but if I remember right, if one pledges full loyalty to their leader, they also pledge their protection benefits to their leader. Buying for themselves then would mean it benefits both; the soldier is protected, and the leader is also protected more.

Also take in mind some people are just insanely rich anyway, so it doesn't hurt to go ahead and beef themselves up for the hell of it.

Etiquette discussions are awesome, but they should be handled correctly, at least to me. We can all agree on similar grounds, but I'm sure nobody likes being told how to act by other people not associated with them. I wouldn't want some Detroit guy, who I have never interacted with, to tell me that I should only talk controversy on the streets when it applies to me only, even though it may apply to everybody. I use Detroit as an example and no, this has not happened.

Anyway, strictness is also an avenue that most outsiders have no influence on. How crews want to act, how they want to run their rules, its all them. There can be common ground amongst them all, but at the end of the day, they're all different. Should we all be more similar, and in doing so be more strict? Maybe, it might help in some regards, but I would suggest talking about what specifically should change, if anything. That's where the opinion-based discussion comes from. Suggest something or talk about an idea, and hear thoughts and support on it.

A directory speech can be taken as a viewing to kill a city just as easy as we all rob post offices each day. I'll take you back to your LA thread where you suggested to remove the "no interference" clause. LA is already a center for wars and murders and chaos, so taking that away just gives people an easier time to claim the City of Angels for themselves. Stability comes from cooperation. I'd say that if we wanted to remain stable, cities should be left as is until things progress enough towards that.

How would a useless discussion bring more people to the table? Note that it's all about telling people how to act, so there's two sides that I see; people who decide to follow through with what you say, meaning they don't have any questions to offer, or people who couldn't care less about what you have to say, and so will just ignore you completely. Neither of those produce discussion. The same goes for rhetorical questions; no answer is expected from them. Do we need everyone coming over here just to say "Yes, I agree." over and over? And even that was a rhetorical question by itself, so I'll answer it for you: No! Nothing is gained from that.

And lastly, just refrain on the personal attack bullshit. It's pretty clear you're here to just shit on LA and dupe us around. Pulling out that philosophical claptrap, as I do say so myself, just leaves me feeling like..."bruh". You don't need to defend yourself by attacking me directly. If that was the case, I'd probably be a little more meaner.

My diagnosis is more of a "guy who is tired of seeing good talking points being treated as ego-drivers" than "paranoid". And now my jaw is sore from all this poppycock stammering I've been doing. Ouch.

Nova, deepest respect. 

Perhaps slightly ironic a discussion founded on the principles of etiquette rapidly devolved into a wild west shootout of verbally-slung zingers. 

My personal concern of etiquette comes from my own experiences, and my own realization thereafter. Once upon a time, great-grand (etc.) pappy was in a crew somewhere in Detroit. Good times, for at least a while. My forefathers and mothers have seen some things, not as many as a lot, more than a few. Let's just say from those experiences I've been graced with the mantle of success at least temporarily. 

Anyhow. I realized that their behavior following a few long lives caused them to not respect the leaders of the world thereafter, barring extraordinary intelligence, conduct, or similar of the leaders with which they crossed paths. I would imagine some might agree with that, and I'm personally still on the fence. 

That crew in Detroit seemed like a good option at the time. The individual running it, whose face and name is perhaps similar to a small child walking around the country recently, was (at least then) a standout. Grandpappy gave them the benefit of the doubt. However, his journal recorded quite a peculiar conversation which was followed quickly thereafter by a sudden lead-based demise. No, he was not a painter, before you ask. 

From what stories I can recall, it had to do with something of a mundane topic, like conversing with fellow crew members. My grandpappy raised a counterpoint, questioning why his activity was in question as he participated occasionally in the coffee lounge chats and the like. That conversation was only brief, with only a few replies between the two. About two hours or so later, grandpappy died. 

I can guess at a couple reasons why he died. Something about bloodlining or purging, obviously we've been there, done that with soapbox talks until the next regime starts shooting people mysteriously. 

Another, perhaps seemingly incongruous, explanation of disrespect. I feel like I have a decent grip on people's thoughts in a straightforward conversation. Not always, not to a fine point, but I can get the general feeling from them. That's a familiar trait. There were no personal affronts in that conversation toward the crewleader. There was no "I will not show up for coffee chats" or extracurricular deeds such as witness catching or lying on shot reports. The talk only had to do with how much grandpappy showed up and greeted people in the morning or wondered about the weather aloud. 

The son of grandpappy had a time to reflect. Why was his father murdered by his boss? Some whispers afterward had to do with explanation one. But the concern for explanation two sustained in his mind. "Why do I not respect leaders?"

This was a half-truth. My family has, to my knowledge, certainly respected leaders in their ability to maintain sovereignty over their decisions, their ability to grow, and their chance occasion to make mistakes. But, after those successful experiences of my family, the novelty depreciated. I'm sure this is not the case for those who haven't been to top of those mountains, or those who enjoy going back there frequently. But, I've struggled with respecting people who visibly do a poor job. Maybe that's elitist. I probably wouldn't do anything about it ever except huff and puff under my breath, but I feel etiquette only takes you to a point. 

I will respect your title. I will respect your achievements. I will respect how you treat me, and how you treat others. I'll be loyal to you by default, and certainly work for the best efforts for the family. 

But if I can't learn anything or have fun within your organization, why in the world do you think I should hold you above others?

An awkward smile and a nod approach, "Been listening in while stretching my legs. Couldn't help but feel the desire to share a wonderful interaction I've just experienced with a Philly Boss. We exchanged niceties after a bust in eaches favour - a heroic save from the slammer for totally illegitmate reasons not involving any floaters turning up in awkward places. That's proper etiquette."

He continues to potter on through the area to finish his meet 'n greets.

While I agree that respect and proper etiquette are important things in of themselves, I disagree with some of the ways these things are utilized.

If you want to open a business I say go for it, it's a great way to get some experience, and earn some money for the family, just so long as the business is in your home city.

Now when it comes to body guards I do prefer that people come and talk to us first as we may have important projects coming up that need to be dealt with first. Generally though it's not a issue and provided they can pay for them we will allow it, as it only boosts our headquarters.

Going down with the ship is something I've always been for, and have never been upset about it, but wiping every living thing isn't always the best of choices in my opinion, but situation dictates that and there can be a million factors.

I agree with not asking for promotions, if the work is there you will be promoted simple as that.

I also agree with respecting those placed above you, but you should have some backbone at the same time, you can both it's called tact.

Lastly

We run a pretty transparent operation where we can, our members know what they're signed up for, and any concerns they have they can bring up directly to myself our Shadow our crewleader. The only time this becomes a problem is if it's done in a disrespectful manner, or if they take it to a public forum as crew matters should stay within the crew. Luckily none of these things have ever been a problem for us and all of the guys we have with us are pretty happy.