Get Timers Now!
X
 
Mar 28 - 19:14:42
-1
Page:  1 2 3 [ > - >>> ]
Let's Talk: Changes Started by: Dusty on Oct 16, '16 22:30

Dusty had busied herself throughout the day trying to grab some cash between meetings. She carried around her note book so she could record her thoughts on her travels. Spotting a park bench she began to write out a little bit of a news letter out.

Often times we find ourselves talking about change in hushed whispers. We don't want to upset the top leaders by suggesting there are ways that we would like to see things. So we keep it in hushed doors, behind closed doors and keep them written down where our next of kin will rush to the streets and start screaming it loud and clear.

Have we ever thought about participating in change, instead of our kin complaining about how nothing changes? I have thought about it and I have decided that we should be able to do this without fear. There is no harm in voicing an opinion. Things we would like to see in our community should not be something to whisper about.

A personal example of a change that I would like to see is after so many talks with other people,  I would love for leaders to make their families a little more open to the possibility of associates transferring elsewhere if they have decided that they no longer wish to be apart of that family. Instead of promoting the death business, we should look at the productivity in our businesses with happy associates.

It could be argued that people just don't care if their associates are happy but maybe it is a growing issue we need to address. I did discuss loyalty and I think if people honestly feel trapped then us as a community need to step up to the plate and look at it realistically. Do we really want people to feel so trapped that when we need them they bail out on us? That they would sit there and scheme behind our backs because we've made them that miserable? This could still happen though if people just want to play the back stabbing game but if we could avoid it to the best of our abilities why not try?

I've expressed a change I personally would love to see, do you dare to express yours? Can't hurt to try and express what it is you want to see changed. If you want to talk about it I'll be lingering along the streets so feel free to stop me on my walks.

Dusty ripped out the paper from her note book and headed down towards the printers. She would have them distribute among the six cities as fast as possible. Once she was finished she would continue her daily walks throughout the streets.

Report Post Tip
This has been an otherwise taboo subject until recent days. The thought of bringing in a change we must entrust ourselves to uphold and maintain is a big ask. If tomorrow I take to the streets however and declare that associates should be free to travel between crews up to the point of Made Man, how long until it becomes an unwritten rule?

Contracted targets are a good example. Who decided five minutes was long enough for a forgetful person to take their shot, before another can intervene? I have seen variables of this time limit, so though it remains an unwritten rule, we still have initiative and deciding authority in how it is followed.

I would be behind this idea, and may even go as far as to bring it to the table at a meeting with our two Chairmen.

An associate of a crew is exactly that; they are associated with them. Not inducted members or bound by contact of employment, but a freelancing street urchin who is looking for the best opportunity.

Will it effect their reputation? Of course, such an attitude to swapping crews is accompanied by a certain stigma in present times, however there is no reason why we can't break down these prejudices and introduce some actual impacting change, on a much wider scale.
Report Post Tip

MikhailKomaro listens as his newly appointed Right Hand spoke to the masses about introducing changes, and what it means to announce them publicly. Voicing your opinion if you will... Mikhail thought about what he would change. He heard her thoughts about associates being about to change who they learn for, and he thought about his own idea.

I think your associate idea is an interesting one Dusty. I believe associates have no ties to anyone but their sponsor. Whether that may be the acting Boss of the crew you're working for, or just another made guy in an organization, that is who you owe your time to. I don't think an associate should lay down their life for a crew or for their Boss because they have not been made members of this 'thing of ours'. Unless said otherwise, I would not expect any associate to die for an organization. 

You may ask about my own associate status and to be quite clear, my Godfather knows where I stand with him. I will live and die for the man. 

My own change I'd like to see is something similar to your own idea Dusty. I believe the rank of Made Man should hold much more than it does today. I mean I think when a Made Man is in the streets, those that are not made should make sure they pay their respects to them. Along with that, I thing actions of made men should also be treated much more severe. If a made man from a crew goes rogue, their former leader should be held accountable for their actions. Along with that, I think sponsors should be held accountable for their associates. 

Mikhail takes a step back to listen to what others have to say about their own views on changes.

Report Post Tip

Kate listens carefully to Dusty's speech and a couple comments, including one from her boss, before stepping forward herself. 

Well I don' t have too much to say, but I'd like to start by thanking Dusty for starting this discussion off. If I can be honest for a minute without seeming like too much of a bootlicker, I think these times of discussions are the toughest thing to pull off the streets- as well as the most interesting, perhaps- and I think Dusty is just about the best at getting them started. So thanks for that, Miss. 

She tips the brim of her hat respectfully in Dusty's direction. 

I entirely agree with the proposal about associates being free to move around. There's already an option to create certain "Made Man only" areas in HQs; this would certainly remove any security concerns that people have. I also think that associates being able to leave puts more responsibility on those in power to run a smooth operation. Seems like a good change to me.

As for changes I'd like to see? More people in the streets, particularly those in bold. Some current bosses are exemplars. Others, perhaps, are a bit lacking. Not every boss has to be a fantastic street speaker, but I believe they should be effective communicators- and they should have to contribute something to prove themselves to the public. I believe more recent developments in our world will emphasize this idea, and I look forward to seeing growth in this area. That's my two cents, at least.

Report Post Tip

Thank you Ms Dusty for bringing this topic to the streets.

Personally I feel that blood in blood out should be at the sole discretion of the Boss.   If you don’t take an oath pledging your loyalty, sporting your family tag you are not Made. Besides a possible repayment you owe the family.  The problem comes when Associates are allowed to hang out in the HQs so long; overhearing things that might be detrimental to the welfare of the family becomes a concern.  They might not be allowed to walk. There should be no restrictions on rank.  The transfer of one person to another crew is the personal business between the two Bosses. It might be beneficial for a Boss to transfer a higher rank to another crew.  Not anyone’s business but theirs.

So I feel if someone is unhappy, or just wish to go elsewhere they need to talk to their sponsor or respectfully approach your Boss. 

Report Post Tip

Harper had the need to clarify what she was saying and stands up again.

Don’t get me wrong I feel that Associates should be granted permission to transfer to another family because they owe the family nothing.  I think it’s a general consensus  between the Bosses that this should be allowed but it can’t be a cross the board rule. It's family business. There is another option if you can’t work things out and still unhappy.  You can take a bullet self inflicted or not.  Might be a little harsh but it's the way things work in this thing of ours.

Report Post Tip
I want to thank Dusty for opening the discussion that has been a bone of contention for several people i have spoken to in my time here. Personally, I took a great deal of time looking around, doing odd jobs for various crews when I first arrived here, as did we all I'm sure. I spoke with various sponsors, I researched various crews and crew leaders, and basically tried to get a feel for how a crew operated. I had several offers to join crews before I finally joined. I did not make this decision lightly, nor did I just join the first crew that extended their hand of welcome. I am not fundamentally opposed to an associate moving from crew to crew, but this should never be taken lightly. We are given plenty of time to choose whom to give our loyalty to, and it is up to us as associates to be careful in our choice. We may become the low nan on the totem pole, but in times of crisis, we are depended on by our sponsors and crew leaders just as much, and sometimes more, that the members of the family. Often times, the very life out our crew leaders lies with us and our gun! We are not just chattel that bulks up the numbers in a crew, we are important parts of this whole thing of ours.

That being said, I think the decision to move between crews should be made very carefully, and with complete open honesty with our sponsors and crew leaders. There should be an established policy established by the crew leader which should be openly communicated to the crew. The new associate usually does not learn of the individual crew leaders' rules until they have already joined and are adked to sign the rules withing the HQ forum. Once those rules are read and understood with our signature, we are committing to that crew with our loyalty and our lives. The crew leader can then depend on us during unfortunate times of strife. However, if we are given a specific period of time to look over the crew rules before signing, it would give us time to make that commitment.

As a sponsor or crew leader, I feel it would be one of many responsibilities to ensure the loyalty, prosperity and security of the people who work for me. If there is some question as to an associate's loyalty and satisfaction, this would undermine my ability to keep my operation working smoothly. If an associate is so unhappy that they want to leave, they will not be effective and productive. But I would not allow associates to scurry between crews like grade school children. I believe specific criteria for leaving and timelines for these criteria could be established. Perhaps a financial "incentive" from the associate's new crew leader to the old crew leader would make the choice of moving between crews a more serious event. How much would the new crew leader really want to invest to bring in an associate from another crew, and what price for leaving would the old crew leader demand?

My thoughts become scattered while thinking about this, but here's the bottom line: we are not forced to join the crew we are in. Our loyalty should lie with the crew we ourselves have chosen. Furthermore, the decision to move from one crew to another could undermine the faith our crew leader has in us. But it should not be taboo to choose to leave. There should be criteria and timelines to be met by the associate wanting to move, the crew leader losing a crew member who has been privy to internal communications, and the new crew leader potentially gaining a crew member who just might, given time, also prove less than fully loyal and leave them as well.
Report Post Tip

ChristianGato if you do bring it to the next meeting id like to add some more sustenance to the suggestion, if i may. I agree, i think that associates should have the option to rethink their decision. Sometimes we all make snap decisions, ones that might not be the best for us. Sometimes we will fall in love with the propaganda that crew leaders might offer, just to fill their HQ. Like we all know, different people require a different way of teaching and if the two sides dont marry well, all this does is decrease productivity between the two and in turn we will see engagement take a huge plunge, this is bad for business. 

Id like to offer some further suggestions on it though; 

  • Each Associate has the option to swap between three crews. They get this option until the time that they reach the ripe old age of Wiseguy or a time period of  8 days, whatever comes first. At this point they then have 24 hours to pick one of their 3 chosen families. Its this family that they will then see the rest of their career out. Hopefully at that point the associate would have made efforts with all three crew leaders to know them enough to be properly inducted into that regime.

 

  • The associate that wants to try his hand at swapping regimes has to do so with written reason to the current crew leader that they are under- this wont be a permission letter, more a common courtesy. After all, it may be that they will return to the initial crew that they where under. This will add a sense of responsibility and not allow it to be a swap and change party when people see fit. There still has to be some measure of control and accountability.

 

  • In the interest of keeping a risk vs reward aspect; i Propose that these respective Associates can not higher any bodyguards at any point until they finally choose their final family to call home. (open to more suggestions on this too) - Could it be that after their time is up (wise guy or 8 days) and an associate has to pick his family out of the three they have chosen to trial, the crew leader can reject his application to come back to one of the other 2 crews? I suppose it falls hand in hand with a favor system, even at associate level.

Also as we know, a lot of the time a family Head Quarters will have sensitive information. This will put more emphasis on what a crew leader will put openly in there. They will have to use that other secret room that only allows those who are made man and above to enter. It adds a slight new consciousness of thinking on what once was something that we did without a second glance.

Dusty, im glad you have stepped out and feel comfortable enough to openly offer a change such as this. Its a landscaping change. A good one at that too. Like you, i have no fear of coming out here and breaking the mold, if you like. I say keep up the excellent work.

Report Post Tip

As she strolled into the middle of the crowd, the smell of coffee on her lips and traditional cup of black tar she called coffee in her hand she looked on.   As she looked for somewhere to lean against she looked around at the gathering crowd before taking another mouthful from the cup and letting off a sigh of relief.

When i must admit although i value my associates and attempt my best to fit them round my organisation i know some have desires of position and power they may not always achieve within my organisation due to the time and experience they have at present and is more a long term objective for them than the short some desired.

Like most leaders have had a few leave with not as much as a mil to chase a dream elsewhere, when realistically they could of transferred.   The likes of Grim, Handlebarz, The_Mage, BigBoss, Anton_Giovanni and others have left to move elsewhere whether due to friends, to support the crew or take hand leadership positions but that is what we hoped of the new world.  I honestly do not see the gain in treating a member like a prisoner which in time will only lead to discontent, suicide or lack of productivity even worse roguedom.   What i would like to find though if someone wanted to leave is the root cause of why, so i can if possible improve myself along the way.
 

I think only a fool doesn't care about an associate as they are the future lifeblood of an organisation, when your made men and above in time take positions within your organisation or leave over time to set up their own organisation those associates should be looking to climb the ladder and fill the holes and be well prepared for it.  Is why sadly associates die in so many wars as can make a difference shooting or pro-wacking.

As for the give ideas after death, i think it is down to the climate sometimes, sadly if people live paranoid or under threat they are more likely to just tow the line and whatever keeps them alive longest out of either pure survival instinct, waiting for their opportunity to change things or in some cases not feeling the need for change.   Personally i know at present something can be suggested or talked through at a leadership meeting, or the foundations laid within an organisation for some matters others need change in a society as a whole.

Report Post Tip

Dusty I completely understand what your saying, however I think the problem is that the bosses look at this as betrayal. In this business switching is hardly ever an option, now I do agree if a member is unhappy where they are then they would talk to there CL about and see if an arrangement can be made to make them feel more at home. If nothing comes of the conversation then yes they should be able to transfer if an agreement between CL's is made to avoid issues. But this is a touchy subject because as I said CL's will 9 times out of 10 look at this as a form of betrayal and its just not how things work in this business.

However I know where you are coming from. I just don't think everyone will see eye to eye on this anytime soon.

Report Post Tip

Hey Dusty, our words here in the streets haven't always exactly matched but are usually pretty close when you take a step back - and I always like the mature way you take the responses that please your ear and those that do not in careful measure and no drama.

I think there is a spin on this to be honest - rather than looking at the associates rights and choices maybe we need to question that leaders choice to invite that person into the family - what they based that choice on, how they keep that person motivated and challenged to see what they really are capable of. I also, and I speak from very recent experience here think it is the mark of a leader in how they conduct themselves in public and in private if someone does want a move - it can to some be unsettling and challenge their security - to others it is viewed as a 'dead wood don't interest me' approach.....I am happy to say that I have yet to have deal with anyone asking to leave us here but I have experienced people wanting to move here...

I think the focus needs to be with the leaders to lead, motivate or otherwise articulately communicate an appropriate course of action with words and not a gun.

Report Post Tip

Tellurium Can you say more on the experience you have with people wanting to move to Philadelphia or your crew? I am interested in what you are trying to convey here. 

In regards to associates swapping crews, as has been mentioned by a few people here. I think my idea is pretty simple. I dont mind. If you are not made then you really arent family. I dont mean that to sound too harsh but it is the truth. There is no doubt sensitive information but i would rather a former REGIME member move to a crew they feel most suits their needs then be stuck and not enjoying their time in Chicago with me. 

I currently have a member who is discerning whether or not to move to a new crew. Again this is unfortunate for me as i believe them to be a huge asset. They have worked tremendously hard and have spent time in conversation with me over and over again. Do i shoot them? Do i tell them no and allow them to suicide or feel like they betrayed me and everything gets awkward? Or do i allow my associate to see if the grass is really greener on the other side. 

My only stipulations for such a move are that i know my former member will be safe in their move. The person willing to take them in provides a detailed explanation of why they want someone formed under my leadership. Finally a compensation for the move. Similar to that of professional sports starts trading from one team to another. If this sounds greedy remember, this is just business and i kill people for a living. Taking money for a member who would have tributed that amount in due time or more is justified i believe. 

I have not took the time to listen to everyone responses but i do think we need to take a deeper emphasis on remembering why we are here. Some of us need to escape the 9-5 life. Some of us needed to escape our own realities. Some of us just find it fun to pull the trigger. Whatever the reason it all comes back to a certain kind of pleasure people get from being here and if one wants to move i dont believe that should be witheld from them. It is sad for a leader to feel as though they could not provide an adequate place for the individual but i am convicted that the best thing the leader could do is send them to a place they truly desire. Whether it is starting up their own crew or moving into another district to marry a person or discerning on switching to a new city because they like mailing each other. 

BrotherHec nods in approval of his own words.

Report Post Tip

Thank you ChristianGato  for your thoughts.

In regards to the reputation, perhaps if people are interested in moving around so much then they should be warned the risks they take? I mean it would be hard for me to trust someone who moves around so much, so I can only think it would be the same with others.


Dusty turned her head towards MikhailKomarov and smiled.

The idea that you have brought up is a really good one. I believe that Made Men needs to have a much bigger importance on it then I have seen. It is a really big step into our community so your change is one I could fully support.

I do have one question though, how far do you think leaders need to be held accountable for their Mades? Are we talking about if they rogue the leader sees a death penalty? Or something harsh without the death? I can understand that sometimes put on a good show of what they are like when they are really planning things behind the leaders back.


Moving off from Mikhail so she could hear another voice speaking, she turned towards KateLogan.

Thank you Miss Logan. I do try to keep the communications going on the topics that I feel should be talked about.

In regards to your change, I would love that as well.  To see the streets bustling is definitely a dream of mine, and to see all the leaders contributing would just be an icing on the cake for me. You're ideas for change would be great to see. Do you have any ideas that it could be implemented?


Thank you Miss Lane for sharing this time with me.

My example was from a few different conversations I had, had regarding loyalty. Many people said they had felt trapped in the families they were in. I can respect your thoughts but do you feel that a leader should try to keep members that are clearly unhappy with them? Would that not be a risk to the leader?

I don't think this should by any means replace communicating with your leader that you had joined. In fact, I would never suggest that someone automatically changes families prior to speaking to their leader for many reasons. Some being concerns of safety, and others just basic respect. I look forward to hearing more of your thoughts on this matter.


Geena_Giovanni, I am so very grateful for your thoughts.

I feel like you have taken my idea and expanded it greatly. I love the extra parts mentioned but one thing I do have a question about, is it really the new leaders job to pay for an associate that wanted to leave their family? I mean they could technically get their next of kin for free. I would like to see it laid on the associate if there were financial terms to look at. Keep in mind those terms may be much smaller but I do not feel it is the responsibility of the new leader unless that person was being taken into their family as a future hand. I mean that associate could just leave them as well and move on.

These moves as Gato said, the more they are done by certain people the more the reputation goes with it. Research should always be promoted before recruitment but I'd love to see less people using that they were trapped in a family as an excuse to jump ships. For me, this idea is to better families and have people that want to be there. As you said anyone that is unhappy won't be productive or even reliable.

Communication should always remain key in any situation between associates and leaders/sponsors.

Report Post Tip

Thank you insta. You're ideas on the improvement of the idea are most welcome.

I like the time limit but my concern is if a family falls and someone who was high rank is now found in a family they dont wish to be in. Should there be a limit on these as well? I know many times they make rushed decisions as well and could like anyone else land in a family they don't want to be in. Have you any thoughts on these people?


Ah Karen, always a pleasure to hear your thoughts. I love hearing how someone takes into consideration the importance of associates and whether they are happy or not. I, too, like to think I take every opportunity to improve myself as well.

Are there any changes you would be interested in seeing in our community?


KL thank you for your thoughts.

It could be argued (and has been often said) that associates do not owe their leaders loyalty until they are Made Man. Perhaps it's a changing of the views on associates that is needed in order to make the change. What do you think?


Hello Tellurium, I do like how you are looking at the flip side.

I did try to incorporate some views on a leadership perspective as well. I feel that not every member will always fit in every family, so it is on the leaders to try to be open and honest when someone is looking for a home. Some of the ways I had suggested before such as, encouraging the potential associate to explore other options or even just getting to know them prior to communicating an intent to sponsor. Sometimes though some things are not communicated and the associate will not find out until they had joined a family.

So that being said, communication is paramount in any aspect. From an associate expressing a wish to transfer all the way to the leaders discussing the possible transfer with each other. It has to be open and honest. If someone does not wish their associate to go, no one could really force them to let them at this current time. But I have to wonder about a leader that would want to keep an associate in their family that clearly does not wish to be there. What good could possibly come from that?

I do very much enjoy looking at the leader approach as well as the associates right. I think there needs to be some form of harmony between the two to make it work.


BrotherHec, a pleasure to see you.

I again have to question if it is the leaders responsibility to pay for the member. As you said they broached the move, not them. Would that financial obligation not fall to the member looking at moving? As well as an explanation from the leader seems a bit much. Perhaps these are things we need to look at in regards to the associate. This may sound harsh but it is the associate that wants to leave, not the leader trying to scoop them up. Unless I am missing something in this situation.

Report Post Tips: 2 / Total: $120,000 Tip

Listening quietly The Bear Jew  finally steps in for a moment. 

insta I think youre on to something. A few blood lines ago I survived a NY purge and a friend let me into his gang in Chi-town, our agreement was I could not have a gun until I made my choice to stay or go. It seemed like a fair deal and did not hinder me either.

 

ChristianGato I think if youre not a good  fit for a crew you should jump ship, however, a merry-go-round of people would also not be Ideal. So we are kind of at an crossroads. Maybe still ask for permission, or at least a mandatory dialog with your leadership?

I feel mildly responsible for this discussion because I have bitched about it so much, but really have not offered anything of substance to make the situation better. 

Report Post Tip
Dusty, it is common for crew leaders to require some form of financial recovery when a member of their crew wants to leave to join another crew. This is less likely to be some form of punishment and more like recovering the tributes the crew member would have sent up if he had stayed in the crew. This is worked out between the two crew leaders involved. Some crew leaders expect this payment to be repaid by the crew member once they have transferred. It also adds one more opportunity to give serious thought to the move. Again, I'm not completely opposed to a less-the-Made crew member wanting to transfer, but this just be done with full cooperation of both crew leaders involved, or the crew member, a d possibly the receiving crew leader can be considered rogue. In this thing of ours, wars have started for less because of the paranoia of the world we do business in. However, we must also keep in mind that leaving a crew could be considered disloyal by some, and the receiving crew leader could lose face and respect as well. It is something that needs to be decided by the crew leaders, with very clear parameters posted and available to the crew members so everyone stays on the same page.
Report Post Tip

Harper stands again to address Dusty.

Let me start of by saying an Associate that hasn’t taken the oath of loyalty and inducted into the family as a Made man are none other than someone trying to make their bones. They have the opportunity to communicate  with each crew accepting members and try to make the best decision in choosing one. If for some reason they feel they made the wrong choice,  they need to discuss it with the CL. It’s just disrespectful to leave a crew without permission plus detrimental to your health. 

It’s going to be a hard pill to swallow that Associates should have the power of crew hopping. When a recruit accepts your invitation they become an investment.  With crew hopping permitted it’s going to hard to decide how much time you want to invest in training a potential candidate who has an open option to leave the family.  They could join your crew without the intentions of ever staying and you have wasted your time.

With the massive war that took place so many lives were lost. It was hard to keep track of the next of kin of the fallen you read about in journals. Members had to make difficult decisions as to what crew they wanted to join.   Some were full and not accepting members.  Some were too young for the opportunities in the free cities and too old for the Manhattan project.  

Now that things are settling down Made members are realizing there are crews that might be a better fit for them.  We shouldn’t perceive this as being disloyal.  I reiterate these people need to respectfully approach their CL with their concerns or have the CL they wish to serve contact the CL with their desire to recruit them.  If they can’t work things out and they are in good standards with the CL, I don’t foresee any problem with their request. My mother made the difficult decision to ask her  CL to leave the family. Her request was honored with no animosity whatsoever and a mutual respect.

I don’t believe any CL wants to harbor a disgruntled member.  It’s not beneficial, serves no purpose and of course a risk.

Report Post Tip

The_Bear_Jew, sometimes talking with other people does help to spark ideas so even if you bitch about something it could still turn into something productive at a later date.  I don't think we are hoping for a merry go around type of deal and those that would do that could only be hurting their own reputation.

Dusty smiles over at Geena.

I know it is common but I think that perhaps we should look at this a little more in depth. While it is nice to get compensation I think that the leader who was approached about possibly taking in a member is not the one we should be looking at. Whose to say the person is tributing or anything to the leader they are currently under? Some may, yes, but some do not. I think the financial burden should fall to the associate. After all it is them that are trying to leave, not the other crew leader saying "Come to me instead." At least I should hope that is not what is happening. In the long run whose to say the member will not leave that leader at a later date anyways?

The only way I could see the leader having to pay for the member is if they are asking for them to be a hand. I just can't see it in the terms of an associate wanting to leave a particular family for another one.

Turning her head and walking a few steps to HarperLane to continue their conversation.

I think I may be confused. You seem to have an issue with those that are associates moving around but not those of higher ranks? I understand your reasoning on the Mades but at some point that can no longer be used as a reasoning.

I can't accept that it is a waste of time to teach anyone or speak to anyone about our way of life. Not every leader is meant for every person. So not everyone will be suitable to a choice they have made. I just don't see the benefit of forcing people to be where they do not wish to be unless they are part of the family. In which case I would wonder why they bothered to get their bones if they planned to just drop them at a moment's notice. 

Report Post Tip

Sorry if I may sound confusing but I don’t have an issue with any of this only an opinion which I seem to be repeating. . Associates are not official members of the family; they may become one at some future point if they prove their worth. The Associate’s initial conversation with different crew sponsors is where this thing of ours is explained.  Once they accept the invite and join the family the teaching and training begins. If you take the effort to give this associate a strong foundation which is time consuming, only to have them have the power to just leave the family and actually leave, is a waste of your time.  With the three crew concept I foresee associates just wandering the halls of your HQs and not putting an effort in proving their worth then heading to the next crew.  Again this is just my opinion and might not be necessary so. Maybe the emphasis will be try and train them anyway.  

Everyone has amble time to decide if the CL and crew feel right to them. It confuses me how emphasis is place on leaders not meant for every person when it’s completely opposite. If the requirements and rules of the Boss are not acceptable don’t take the oath of loyalty to him and become Made, ask to move on. If it’s in a pine box so be it.  

It’s perceivable to think after all that has transpired lately after a certain length of time a Made man has become dissatisfied with where they are or just wish to be elsewhere. In this thing of ours it’s always been taboo to want to leave a family as well as recruiting from one, but it happens. The only concerned parties are the one wishing to leave, the CL that wants to accept them and the member’s CL.  There’s no rule to combat this. The rapport you have with the CL is the only thing that will decide this.

Report Post Tip

I seem to be bumping into you in the streets quite regularly Dusty. Not that that is a bad thing. You have a brought up a subject that is close to my heart, as we have previously discussed. Any time my family has had a chance to lead, they have included in their rules the option for associates who are not happy in their family to leave, all they have to do is come and say they aren't happy. An explanation as to why they aren't happy would also be appreciated, but its not necessary. In the past, this would have been frowned upon... these people are brought into your HQ, are privy to your secrets, and your most private notices, but that's simply not the case any more. You can mark notices in your HQ for the attention of Made Men only. This means that only people you trust get to see them.

I never liked it as an excuse any way. What is to stop someone joining your family, stealing all your secrets, passing them onto their next of kin, or a friend, and suiciding? Your secrets where out there, in the hands of your enemies or your rivals regardless.

Another reason for not allowing this is the fabled 'I took them in, I gave them shelter and protection.' And? What do you want, a gold star? Unless you gave them money or some other reward, you have lost nothing. Even if you have invested time in their training, you have not lost as the over all community will gain from a better trained more knowledgable mafioso some day, and not just another trigger happy moron. Forcing the person to remain results in one of two things. They die by their own hands, or they slip into a coma never to return.

This world can have a strong grasp on the uninitiated, if we give them a chance. Should we punish someone for a basic decision made in haste? From the moment they step of the boat, new lines and old, they are bombarded with tales of how they will die if they don't find a family quickly. Hell if I knew no better myself, I'd probably be in the same position. Stuck somewhere I wasn't happy, doing the bear minimum to get by.

I've made this point before, and I will make it again. Associates are nothing until you give them the chance to prove themselves. These people aren't mafioso, they are street hoods, gang members, petty thieves. They are the young men and women who live in our neighbourhoods trying to get the scraps from our tables, trying to make a way for themselves until such times as someone recognises that spark they possess and nurtures it, and inducts them into the way of things.

Let me tell you a story. I'm not 100% sure that it perfectly exemplifies what I'm trying to say, but in my head it does. When my family first came to the old world some 13 years ago, they joined a family run by a man called LiaVazzi. They knew nothing of this man or his organisation, but they wanted to prove themselves. They were active earners, they engaged in street discussions, and they worked hard. After a week or so, some wiseguy in Vazzi's family tried to shake him down, put the squeeze on him. My ancestor threatened to shoot the man if he didn't back down. The man went to LiaVazzi and complained that my ancestor had threatened him, so Vazzi had them both taken out and shot. No questions, no sought explanations, nothing. He was too busy to have to deal with a couple of squabbling associates.

That one experience soured my families opinion of Vazzi and his descendants for a good 8 years. Not one of my family has ever worked for that man again. However, someone in another family took notice of my ancestor, and his son, and how they acted, and he made an offer we couldn't refuse. Every member of my family since has been affiliated with that family in one way or another. I have friends who's ancestors worked in that family and we have worked together at every opportunity ever since.

 

Now, having heard out loud what I was saying I see it doesn't exactly cover what I wanted to say, but what it does say is this. How we treat the associates in our family will colour their opinions of us and our descendants, possibly for all time. Really, how hard is it to say to a Goomba or an Earner, I'm sorry you aren't happy here, is there another family you'd like to try?

Report Post Tip

This Forum Is For 100% 1950's Role Play (AKA Streets)
Replying to: Let's Talk: Changes
Compose Body:

@Mention Notifications: On More info
How much do you want to tip for this post?

Minimum $20,000

(NaN)
G2
G1
L
H
D
C
Private Conversations
0 PLAYERS IN CHANNEL