______, why shouldn't Scandia be able to question it, if said
questioning is done so in a respectful manner? Tyrion was out here a
couple of days earlier asking for people to come out and express their
thoughts and wanting to see more debate. Now that we get some form of
that you question someone's ability to judge? - Dante_Balboni

Because, Dante... as the saying goes. Put up or shut up.

I actually agree with _______ here. If you have no aspirations of being a leader then I believe you're out of order to question who gets the honour. Why should you be allowed to have an opinion on something that s NEVER going to effect you personally. Sure, you're buddies might go on to become a leader, but then why aren't they out here preaching their case?

If we only discussed and questions things that we could physically
alter, we would all be sitting in silence listening to Deimne chew the
fat with ScipitaRourke, Lucretia_Borgia, Kates, Iota and PoisonousJelly. - Gwarble

Not necessarily, time changes everything my friend. Just because people cannot physically alter things NOW doesn't mean they won't in the future. Your perception of being able to physically alter things is extremely distorted and narrow minded, so as long as the aspirations are in the right place then it matters not whether you are a leader or not at the present time, it's where you INTEND to be at the end of the line.

Sorry, what are you on about Teq? Firstly, you're saying that if you have no aspirations to be a leader you aren't allowed an opinion on those that do have the honour? Utter bollocks. Granted, whether you have enough subtlety of opinion to get away with voicing your thoughts is a separate matter. That aside, of course people that don't aspire to be leaders can have thoughts on either, A, existing leaders, B, proposed leaders and C, what exactly it takes to be a leader. They might not want to lead, but that has absolutely no bearing on whether they know what it takes or whether they have an opinion.

Something that's not going to affect them personally? Last I checked, we're all affected by quality of leadership and we have every right to question it within the limits placed on us by those in power.

Regarding your point about what Gwarble said....aren't you just agreeing with him?

Utter bollocks? lol

Let me expand a little further Hoopi. The point I was trying to make was... if someone doesn't even have the drive to become a leader, then (in my eyes)they have no drive to change things, if they have no drive to change things then why the fuck should they be allowed an opinion on it. I'm sick and tired of people thinking they have automatic rights here. You have no fucking rights, you are a mobster, you gave up your rights when you became a criminal. 

All affected by quality of leadership? Hows that? Your buddy died? To coin a phrase... utter bollocks. A mobster should have 2 people in their minds. Their boss... who can choose to end their life at any time and themselves... who can choose were they want to go. If the whole of New York died the only way it would effect me was if my boss had killed them. If I dunno... *insert random name here* killed them then what the hell is it to do with me? Do I engage in talk with the other leaders about it? No, my boss does or the highest person in the structure does. It effects HIM, NOT me. People here have an over-inflated sense of self importance, they believe their role is much bigger than it really is. Sorry to burst their bubble.

Now I await your comment about how I have an over-inflated sense of self importance with baited breath :)

if someone doesn't even have the drive to become a leader, then (in my eyes)they have no drive to change things, if they have no drive to change things then why the fuck should they be allowed an opinion on it. I'm sick and tired of people thinking they have automatic rights here. You have no fucking rights, you are a mobster, you gave up your rights when you became a criminal.

Who says anyone has automatic rights? If you pay attention, you'll see I said "whether you have enough subtlety of opinion to get away with voicing your thoughts is a separate matter". There are many people with enough subtlety of opinion around here to get away with voicing their opinion. So, ignoring that redundant point, the main thrust is that you're saying someone who doesn't strive to be a leader shouldn't have an opinion, but those who are striving to be a leader can have one? So they get special rights (in your eyes) based on where they see themselves in 3 months time? Nonsense.

All affected by quality of leadership? Hows that? Your buddy died? To coin a phrase... utter bollocks. A mobster should have 2 people in their minds. Their boss... who can choose to end their life at any time and themselves... who can choose were they want to go. If the whole of New York died the only way it would effect me was if my boss had killed them. If I dunno... *insert random name here* killed them then what the hell is it to do with me? Do I engage in talk with the other leaders about it? No, my boss does or the highest person in the structure does. It effects HIM, NOT me.

What don't you understand about us all being affected by quality of leadership? Do we all have a leader? Yes. Are we individually affected by their quality of leadership? Yes. Are we therefore all affected by quality of leadership? Yes. Did I, at any point, say you should be concerned about anyone other than yourself or your own leader? No. Despite this, can I infact have an opinion on you or your leader if I really want? You better believe it.

People here have an over-inflated sense of self importance, they believe their role is much bigger than it really is. Sorry to burst their bubble.

I couldn't agree more. The best example I can think of off the top of my head is an LA gangster making generalised statements and, to paraphrase, telling people that if they don't want to be leaders one day, they can shut the fuck up because they don't have the privilege of an opinion. To coin a phrase...

Unfortunately, I must soon dash so I haven't got the time I'd like to put forward all my opinions on this matter, but one statement I would like to pick up on is this:

If you have no aspirations of being a leader then I believe you're out of order to question who gets the honour.

Now, I may be taking this to the nth degree, far too literally than it was meant, but I simply cannot agree to this logic. Not that I wish to blow my own trumpet, but as the senior advisor to one of the most senior members of our thing, I like to consider myself a fairly influential and important figure. However, I have no wish to wear the ring on my pinky finger, no wish to wear a bold suit. Why? My reasons are my own, and frankly irrelevant. 

Yet the point stands that according to your logic; because I do not wish to pursue leadership, I apparently do not have the drive to change things, and as such my opinion is significant? Preposterous.

The leader of a syndicate, and this may shock you, is not the be all
and end all. He is, without question, an integral cog in the machine.
Without him, the machine would never even function. Yet by the same
token, various other indivudals represent cogs which, should they not
exist, will result in an inefficient machine that will eventually grind
to a halt.

Let's take Chrissy the Consigliere for example. He is an essential part of his family's workings. His knowledge of inter city dealings is second only to his political savvy. His insight and forward thinking is one of the crucial factors in his leader's ascendency, but he prefers to pull strings from behind the scenes. Then we have ol' Eric the Enforcer. This guy, mia marone! He could shoot the dick off a fly from 80 yards with a nail gun. He doesn't want to be a leader, he knows being in the limelight will bring unwanted attention to his family.

According to you, these people (and everyone else who plays a crucial role for their family, but do not want to lead) are apparently lacking drive and commitment. I think you need to stop placing such vast importance on one position. Whilst it's true that, obviously, the buck stops with the big guy; it's also worth remembering that a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link.

I'm not entirely sure why you've quoted me here, but in for a penny.

It isn't your intentions that entitle you to anything around here, it is the position you've earned. As a New York Boss I'm confident that I'm allowed to express my opinion, mainly because I've spent the last few months building my name and reputation demonstrating that I know what I'm talking about. Clearly the upper structure of this city agrees that I've earned the right to do so or they would strip me of my title. This isn't an automatic privilege; this is something that I worked for and have been rewarded with. I made my bones and now I'm trusted enough that I can be responsible with the words that come out of my mouth.

You can have an opinion on anything that those with power allow you to have an opinion on. If Deimne issues instructions through the New York families that nobody is allowed to discuss this, then I'm fairly certain that the button men from New York will fall completely silent. This is because our Godfather has the power to issue mandates like this and the muscle to make sure they are followed. Everything else is completely irrelevant, other than what you've earned and what you can do.

Do you think a no-name Gangster could come out here and call everyone a fucking moron like FlyingPig did? Hell no. He knows he has the backing of those powerful enough, which means he can address the masses with his Billy Big Balls routine and nobody, shoots him. He openly admits he has no desire to lead, are we going to advocate that one of the few knowledgeable people in our society is silenced on account of his lack of intent to lead? I certainly hope not. He's the second in command to a New York family - whether he wants to lead or dress up as a wedge of cheese and lie between two pieces of bread doesn't alter the fact that he's made his bones and has the power to open his mouth.

The point to all this, is that the only entitlement around here comes from the rank you've earned and the importance that the power players place on them. Your intentions are irrelevant and a Gangster with leadership aspirations has absolutely no right to question anybody. They haven't earned their position, they haven't made their bones and they should frankly shutup and listen whilst those who have speak. There are very few people who know more about this than I do and by speaking I'm almost certainly putting someone on the right track because I know what I'm talking about. This can be repeated for people like FlyingPig and Noah_Levenstein who've spoken here already, neither of whom would be welcome to speak under a ridiculous 'only leaders to be can question leaders'.

This I think, ties in with setting an example that someone spoke of earlier. This shouldn't just come from the leaders; this should come from the Made Men, the Capos, the Bosses and so on. If people understood more about what these positions meant they would be far more hesitant to hand them out to those who are undeserving.

~G~warble.

I must comment on this as I see it as being the most important information I have read since stepping off the boat. I have read and understood every word. My hat is off to F_P for creating and publishing such brutal honesty.This is a post everyone should read young and old either fresh off the boat or experienced mafioso. I have many opinions about this thing of ours, some personal and others out of respect. I have every right to them, they are mine. They are what will take me where I want to go. Its knowing how and when to differentiate the two that allow me to co-exist. The same applies to voicing them. I can certainly say this holds true for everyone.

I am not here for a debate, I am here however to be the example many of you are speaking of. As Noah stated we are all spokes in a wheel. Too many broken spokes and the wheel breaks. In our world a broken spoke can be represented as poor leadership or disregard for the responcibilities of ones rank/title. (A fatcat getting by on the buddy system). In some cases a skinnycat. There is a fine line between stepping up and being a leader (be it helping someone fresh off the boat) (running a city) or (creating an important public post) and talking about leading. Your either driving the car, or your a passenger along for the ride. No one likes a backseat driver.

I for one, (as a crew member of RampagingFox) as a member and as a new beginner can attest to the fact that he is leading. His crew represents him just like he represents them. Many of our crew post regularly. We are small spokes in a big wheel.

This is why he is not questioning everyone elses abilities or (lack there of) in the streets. His duty is not to support everyone elses flunkies who cannot get the help they seek through thier own crew leaders or have not been instructed of what they need to be doing. It is the respocibility of each leader in each branch of the family tree to command thier respective crew(s). To Lead.

Respectfully,

~Alfonce

Lucretia, during one of her evening strolls across main street, happens to overhear a few bits of a discussion of leadership and who is when it is proper to voice an opinion on who should have the honor. One tidbit makes her wrinkle her nose in particular, and she is disappointed that the discussion quickly turns to other aspects of why this particular opinion it may or may not be misguided. She decides to go back a page in the conversation and interject on the subject.

One of the esteemed men in this conversation earlier said the following:

If you have no aspirations of being a leader then I believe you're out of order to question who gets the honour. Why should you be allowed to have an opinion on something that s NEVER going to effect you personally.

I feel that I have to go back a few steps in the discussion and say my part on this. The idea that who is given positions of leadership has no bearing on anyone but the leaders themselves is woefully inaccurate. As we have seen time and time again, when poor leadership decisions are made it is not simply the leader that is held accountable for them. Families, even entire cities, are wiped clean over this sort of matter. "My leader did it, don't shoot me, I disagreed!" ranks up there with "no one told me not to!" in the hall of fame of bad excuses. Not to mention a run of piss-poor leadership impacts everyone when the inevitable and necessary war happens in order to remove the poor leadership. Saying who becomes leader is of no concern to the everyday mobster is as mistaken as mistaken can be, in my opinion. If someone has an idea that would ensure higher quality of leaders, it is certainly a topic that is of everyone's concern, and quite proper for open and public discussions.

I think that a certain distinction needs to be clarified as to the point this conversation has turned to.  Let's distinguish between "it is of no concern to the average gangster" and "it is not the average gangster's decision to make".

It is accurate to say that when it comes to deciding who will be the next Boss of a family to branch out, it is not the average gangster's decision to make.  Absolutely, the average guy on the street will have no impact on this decision.  Now then, that is not the same thing as saying that it is of no concern to the average gangster.  I may concern myself over plenty of things that I have no role in deciding.  I may concern myself with who will be elected Prime Minister of Canada, even though I live in New York and am a U.S. citizen.  The fact that I have concern over an issue is a sentiment that I feel, and it is something that simply exists, right or wrong.  Nobody can tell me not to feel something.  I can't even tell myself not to feel something.

In summation, there is a big difference between having an influence on a decision and having concern over the decisions made.

All valid points, and I apologise to Scandia for dismissing his comments.

Although, to be fair, Over the past 2 months I have noticed a fair amount of family activity attempting to rekindle the streets. I myself and rather street active and even run a Lottery. I think I am capable to lead, but I guess my memers are the ones whom see the true face of everything. So It's really down to them alone to judge if I am a good leader or not.

Members*

The guildmaster coughs in an attempt to cover his poor speech.

my memers are the ones whom see the true face of everything. So It's really down to them alone to judge if I am a good leader or not.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on that point. Yes its hugely beneficial for a leader to be appreciated, respected and even loved by his family members but they are in no position to pass final judgement on him. As appreciated as their council may be, they are all, by definition, subordinates.

As a leader your peers are the other leaders. Those that have the same role as you in the community. From the Godfathers and mothers down through all the various leaders, it is for them to pass real judgement on your ability. Being loved by a devoted family who appreciate the way you lead is only one aspect of leadership. Granted its a bloody important one but its not the whole picture. Leaders should always be expected to have a public presence, be seen to be active in the community among other things.

In Cow's version of this things are all wrapped up rather quickly:

"I have everyone"

Spelling kills impact - write that down 100 times

Spelling kills impact

Spelling kills impact

Spelling kills impact

Spelling kills impact

Spelling kills impact

etc