Interesting questions there JaryllJicchai. They suggest a very interesting view on the world.

I'm not sure I could ever look upon it as something so black and white. Favor, in my eyes at least, would never be a cookie-cutter exercise of ticking boxes and something you achieve or don't. It could never be so binary. It would, by its very nature, be fluid and dynamic. I think daniella explained it very well...

Perhaps they would have been, if they had gained enough favor. If enough of the Godfather’s advisors had come forward and said “Hey, I’ve really gotten to know that person, they’ve made a lot of effort and I don’t think they would really participate in this.”

It isn't as simple as saying three leaders were killed as they were out of favor. If they had been in favor there's a good chance the surfacing of this information would have been more than enough to shunt them the hell back out of favor and still result in their deaths. It just means they would have had a higher chance of being approached about certain aspects or having someone say "hang on a minute, I don't want to see <insert someone awesome like Argyle here> hurt" due to the relationships they'd formed.

Things just aren't so black and white that you can always put them neatly in a box based on certain thresholds in the real world. If it were, we'd have set processes for every single thing that happens in our lives. Instead, we all have free will. We all have the ability to choose. It's those choices that separate the great from the good and the leaders from the soldiers. It's up to leaders to form qualitative as well as quantitative views on those around them. Our world isn't just black and white, it's full of color and shades. That's what makes it so interesting and exciting. Someone should really write a book about it. They could call it "50 Shades of Grey".

*Makes a mental note to suggest Reggie, being somewhat of an expert at life, gets someone working on that right away* 

I feel it's important for us to avoid too many tick the box exercises. If we get to the point that New Frontier (copyright The Potato) leaders are hitting the streets to give speeches out of necessity rather than motivation to actually engage on a topic or engage with the community then things have derailed. The quality drops, the motivation drops, the number of speeches increases but nobody will stop long enough to hear a damn word as there might not be a word worth hearing for days on end. There are all sorts of way of gaining favor, all sorts of ways to develop relationships and all sorts of ways to get to know people. The street is often highlighted as the pinnacle because it allows you to reach the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time. It doesn't make up for shortcomings in other areas, replace the need for a basic ability in all the other skills required or mean there is any less of a requirement on leaders to make those tough choices and actually lead.

In the open cities, just as everywhere else, the world needs leaders that will stand and lead. Leading isn't ticking check boxes, it's leading. It's why we have so much variety, fun and options in this world of ours. It's great. 

Since TsuDhoNimh seems to have stolen the words right out of my mouth (great minds think alike, right? Isn’t that what people say?) there isn't much for me to say, at risk of being repetitive. However, I will take a moment to affirm that the way he explained favor is exactly how I understood it myself and seems to be confirmed by the explanation that Godfather Bonkers already provided.

In my earlier statement I never said that those three leaders were completely out of favor. I simply suggested that this particular situation outweighed any favor they may have earned up to their death. In my eyes, everyone who chose to start a free city started in a neutral position and each choice that they make as a crew leader serves to move the level of favor they've earned in one direction or the other. Obviously I don't know if that's how Godfathers Fitz and Bonkers intended it, but that's how I understood it with the explanations that have been provided since the opportunity was first started. 

Thanks TsuDhoNimh. Although I already found the practical answers that fit in the topic being discussed here, I do appreciate the chance to further discuss on a more abstract level regarding the policies we see in our world today. Not sure if this is the place and time but I feel your response warrants a reply.

Regarding that, I understand you and agree with what you say as well. To me it makes complete sense that we do our actual business in a gray area, integrating context into the decisions regarding policies. But I’d like that gray area be a practical playing field for black & white guidelines. Godfather Bonkers made a serious statement regarding the expectations for type of street participation. If this is a firm expectation, we can hold all leaders, whatever city to it. The gray area allows for leniency in some cases. But without naming the exact black & whites, the gray area can become a place where people hide who don’t meet the standards. I think we should aim high and allow exceptions in the gray area, but let’s not sit collectively in the gray area and be happy if we see a rare few meet the more challenging standards. This counts especially for leaders as they are an example for the next generation.

So on the official level I like to talk in black & whites, as that allows us to test what we do and makes sure we don’t deviate from what we set out to reach. I want to see this favour-system succeed. It’s quite possibly that I’m the biggest supporter of this thing and that I’ve studied it’s possible workings more than many others. But with that I’ve learned much about it’s possible pitfalls as well. Getting the black & whites to surface gives everyone the most honest expectations, how extreme they may sound.

During one of my studies I came across these statements of a young Daniella regarding a comparable favour-system that was in place before it’s current variant. Thank god the national library keeps record of important discussion so we can learn from them. She there agrees with the late Slash about that the vague nature of the system added to the fear that many seemed to experience in those times. So that’s an apparent gray area that led to fear. Next she makes a statement where the extremes, black & whites, sickened her as well. Apparently the idea that a leader who isn’t vocal in the streets was not a good leader created fear, resistance and uncertainty about one's status as well. Although it needs noting that without additional reason, never once was a leader consequenced for not meeting this extreme standard though. There was being governed in the gray area, but apparently the message of extremes got across, regardless of whether that was a good message or not. Without black & whites, it’s hard to get a message across.

But continuing, if the statements by Daniella at that time speaks facts - which they probably did, because others made similar statements - we should conclude that despite the intent of the administration which issues and enforces these policies, that the sense of it all is probably lost on many of those who aren’t part of the enforcing parties. Or atleast, the communication of intent is vital to it's broader understanding where the people who governed back then clearly failed. The reason why I ask questions and seek for black & whites answers is that how shocking or unrealistic they may be, they give us the most solid context for an interpretation of it all. And with it, it allows for the most truthful understanding of this system. That should in turn help further its success instead of having a majority of people nodding that they like the system while they really think it’s just a tool to oppress them. Misinterpretation of intent can have two reasons. Either an inaccurate message is being sent or people don’t understand the message you’re sending. That’s a problem which needs to be solved. And asking questions about how things are intended to work helps. Noteworthy is that people who asked the right questions back then and made an effort to understand it all have been known to be most successful and some are still today.

So yeah, to sum up. Let’s be humane and practical in the gray area when we make our decisions. But let’s define clear borders for it. that allows us to truthfully decide what we should or shouldn’t do. Not naming our ultimate goals allows people and leaders in all cities to stray far from them. Not defining the black & whites creates uncertainty and incorrect assumptions in the annexed… pardon, New Frontier. At the same time it offers a lot of opportunity for Vegas, Chicago and New York leaders to not meet those same standards without consequences.

And other than that there will undoubtedly be people who are afraid of the enforcers of the system. I just try and ask the questions others might not dare to ask. Let’s try to clearly define what these policies really mean and make it to a success together.

I realise I sometimes seem extreme, but that’s with a purpose. Below the surface I’m probably a softy that just wants people to have a good time and in that sense I agree with how great the variety is that our worlds offers. But my conscience kicks in once in awhile and that makes that I like to question the approaches that give a bad example to a majority. The people who work on this side of the law are few. I want them to have a good time. But I prefer to push them to excellence instead of reaching out with a soft touch just so that they are comfortable. That’s why the black & whites.

So Daniella, now you’ve furthered your career quite a bit. How would you reflect on the current favour-system after you witnessed the previous one to be quite sickening? And let’s focus on the present. How do you think that we can prevent what caused the previous enforcers of a similar system to be considered as tyrants who played a game of fear?

Personally my favorite difference is that leadership of the traditional cities openly admitted to address lacking standards within their own cities, instead of just judging the New Frontier. To me this shows a collective support of the system, which to me is vital to its continuation.

Ah Mr. Jicchai where do I start? I will admit that I am amused that you find it so important to search through archives to find words from my youth. I would say that I’m impressed that you’d go through all the trouble but that would be a lie. You want an explanation for those words? To understand why my views have changed, or if they have at all? I’ll give you one, that’s fine, but you may not like what I have to say. Then again, you are a fan of publicly shaming people so I suppose you may not really mind at all.

You say that Godfather Bonkers made a bold statement about street presence. I suppose that’s one way to put it, but I think you’re trying to make a mountain of a molehill. The only person’s street presence he mentioned was Angelina’s and she wasn’t killed for her street presence, or lack of. It simply didn’t help her grow and expand as she likely wanted to be able to do. This only supports what has already been said by him and Godfather Fitz in the past in regards to these cities. If Angelina had been killed because her lack of street presence in the right areas, then so be it, that’s a very clear black and white statement. But she wasn’t.

Now, let’s talk about my past words. This is a comparable favor system to what was in place before, you’re right. The biggest difference, to me at least, is who is leading it. It amuses me that you pick that particular thread, written by a woman who doesn’t know the basic definition of bloodlining and who called Chicago a big threatening city when truthfully, under Godfather Kurgan, all cities were allowed to build and flourish at will. But I digress, let me get back on topic here. Perhaps some of my views have changed. Such a thing happens with age, as I’m sure you’re aware. I am my mother’s daughter but over time I have formed my own opinions and ideas. Unlike some, I don’t simply echo the feelings and opinions of my ancestors again and again. I form new ones. The fear that I spoke of at that time wasn’t because of the favor system, or the way that it existed or the rules that were in place. The fear existed because two of the three Pillars at the time thrived off of it. While some of my views may have changed, I will happily repeat these words again here today: Godfather Rob claimed he didn’t want to be a tyrant, claimed he wanted to be different than those before him but instead he was exactly the same, simply with different expectations. I would say the same of Godfather Gato. But, as you stated yourself, there will undoubtedly be people who are afraid of the enforcers of the system, so the fear I spoke of in the past shouldn’t exactly be a surprise to you.

Black and white extremes do sicken me Mr. Jicchai. And so far I haven’t seen Godfather Bonkers or Godfather Fitz set those sorts of extremes. The key word there is extremes. They have outlined a system and they have stated their expectations and the consequences of not meeting those expectations. They understand that having a gray area is simply part of the process; that each leader is an individual with individual needs or desires. They seem to have gotten their message out very clearly, and when they haven’t they have left the doors open for a variety of questions. They don’t shame people who don’t understand; they explain and teach and leave room for growth. Their style and approach is different and in my opinion it’s far better than the former approach taken by the Pillars. For example, I highly doubt that Godfather Bonkers would ever allow his right hand to create a speech here in the streets that publicly shames a Godfather in Las Vegas and vice versa. I'm not sure we could say that same of Don Borkers right hand man, that one is a law onto his own, but he's harmless enough really, nobody seems to mind the drunken Irish slurs.” Daniella smiled, speaking of one of her favorite people, TsuDhoNimh, who was standing nearby.

“They respect each other and they expect the people in their cities to do the same. In fact, in the very same archives you bring forward from the past, Godfather Disorder speaks about respect for rank, something Godfather Rob and his right hand flouted at. If they didn’t feel someone deserved their rank they were quick to point it out and speak down to them.

Now, there is something that you said that I do agree with, shocking I know. The communication of intent is vital to its understanding. I don’t know if I would say the people who governed back then failed to communicate their intent so much as they didn’t leave themselves open to the questions people would ask to gain that understanding. Many felt that their pompous and self-righteous attitudes were off-putting and intentionally stayed away from them. My mother’s journals reflect a conversation she once had with Godfather Rob where he simply.....stopped responding. Perhaps he didn’t like what she had to say? Or maybe if she had brought them out onto the streets they would have received a more consistent response? I can’t know, of course, but she expressed being rather disappointed that her challenges to his positions and viewpoints would go unanswered in private.

Once again I will state that it wasn’t the favor system itself I found sickening; it was the way it was handled by the leadership at the time. My mother’s strong dislike for the way Godfather’s Rob and Gato handled themselves were well known to her own Godfather, Nakamura. He valued her for it, because without dissent can a system ever really thrive? How can you fix what’s wrong if you’re not even willing to hear the other side of things? And that is one of the things that my mother and I have in common - I call bullshit when I see it.

Now, don't get me wrong here. If I change my mind on a topic, I'll happily come out here and express it. Changing your mind or opinion on something in light of new information or a new approach is an important part of growth. When you gain more experience and learn new things it would be nothing short of foolish to tightly hold onto old opinions when newer and better-educated ones can be reached. Failing to move on and evolve from the opinions of our parents and forefathers is one of the biggest issues that strikes our world at times.

You asked me how I think we can prevent what caused the previous enforcers of a similar system to be considered as tyrants but I don’t think that has an answer. Undoubtedly there will be someone in this world of ours that does consider them tyrants, that is scared of them or that will have issues with them no matter what approach they take. That’s the way of things in our world.

But still, I’d say Godfathers Bonkers and Fitz are already doing a great job leading this favor system. They don’t come out here holding themselves to be better than anyone. They don’t imply that without them the world around them would come crumbling down. They leave themselves open to communication, they laugh and joke with other leaders, they make themselves available to everyone. But when someone so clearly and blatantly disregards the rules set in place, as these families in DT did, they handle it. You say that under the old system not a single leader was faced with consequences for not meeting the extreme standards that were set but was that really a good thing? If you’re going to be all words and no action, then eventually people are going to stop believing your words. What's the old saying around here? The action is yours, the reaction is not.

    "Sitting on the side of all the action he grins as the Godfather speaks.The Crowds and crowds of people struggling for the attention and opportunity to be noticed by one of the most powerful men in this thing of ours. As Santos walks up to the Godfather he is greeted by his body guards which all knowledge the presence of Santos and allow him to pass as they are all aware of his loyalty and bond with the with the City of Chicago Santos rests his hand on The Godfathers shoulder as The Godfather turns to look to see who has gotten his attention he grins and Santos begins to speak. "

The Men that sit at your table are there because they've won the most important thing anyone could ever be awarded...

Santos Pauses and makes sure the crowd has settled and continues

Your trust Godfather! Your trust.

You see, now that you've opened the books I'm the Guy. I'm that man that everyone else pretends to be. I'm the one equal to the men and women that sit at your side, and I will never or ever betray.

I've sat by your side through the new times, the bright times the dark times. I've never wavered. I've never bent nor bowed to your enemies.

Im that man Bonkers and I'm here to say that Detroit would be in NO better set of hands.

Santos turns away from the crowd and whispers softly so not to be herd.

It's my turn, it's my time.

Santos steps to the back of the crowd and lets the people continue.

-Santos- Detroit is open for business, if you wish to take a spot then let's talk about the details privately. Alternatively you may wish to explore your bright future within Chicago.

Daniella and JaryllJicchai - let me briefly summarise for those who weren't able to catch all of that...I do however suggest that people cast their minds back to catch the full detail as I wont do the responses full justice...

Jaryll made the following points:

• This favour system is similar, but not identical to the system managed by the three pillars
• He notes that there are some firm expectations for leaders, but there are grey areas rather than pure boundaries for what defines in/ out of favour
• He asserts that these standards apply to leaders in established cities as well as the "New Frontiers"
• He suggests that the boundaries, being insufficiently well defined mean that essentially only those at the top of Chicago and LV really know where they lie and this risks driving fear into the masses

Daniella made the following points:

• She notes that the Detroit leaders who met their end were not removed for failing to deliver meaningful street presence, I.e. It was related to what they were doing behind the scenes that catalysed action
• She notes that a major difference between this system and the previous system is that we have unity at the top - regular communication and genuine friendship between key leaders, without undermining public outbursts
• She believes that the openness of current leaders means that if anyone is unsure of where the lines are they can just ask

I would like to address a few of these specific points myself.

There are indeed grey areas and I believe this to be completely necessary for two reasons: 1.) So that people don't "game" the system, 2.) Because I cannot define what drives my "gut feel" on a person.

Hopefully any leader, potential leader or indeed any person in any city feels that my door is open. I aim to be an approachable character and hopefully people will attest to this. The role of the godfather does mean communicating over all else. While I or Fitz may occasionally have other business to attend to back in the old country both of us aim to operate an open door policy on incoming questions

In terms of where the standards apply (and I do actually like the term annexed cities as for the time being as it reflects the nature of the relationship with the mothering city) it is primarily a favour system intended to allow those unknown to us personally to have a chance at moving the dial in this world of ours. It is a way of judging and progressing these individuals. In my own city the grey area is broader - because everyone here has earned their place by gaining my absolute trust in their loyalty and potential. Nonetheless, if they ever want to drive the agenda they may need to pull their fingers out in some cases.

The key to why we will make this system work is that 1.) FitzChivalry and I are now completely interconnected and 2.) We are open to feedback - so long as it is respectful.

Hopefully any leader, potential leader or indeed any person in any city feels that my door is open. I aim to be an approachable character and hopefully people will attest to this. The role of the godfather does mean communicating over all else. While I or Fitz may occasionally have other business to attend to back in the old country both of us aim to operate an open door policy on incoming questions

 

Gasps for air, "Sorry, I choked on that last drink of singlemalt" 

Hopefully any leader, potential leader or indeed any person in any city feels that my door is open. I aim to be an approachable character and hopefully people will attest to this. The role of the godfather does mean communicating over all else. While I or Fitz may occasionally have other business to attend to back in the old country both of us aim to operate an open door policy on incoming questions

"I do agree with this statement, as Bonkers and FitzChivalry have been more than gracious in answering questions that I have.  They have been most approachable, and I have no problem flying to either city and having a sit down with either of them. " 

"I'd concur. They are both extra friendly. Despite sometimes finding Fitz in a state of undress or Bonkers busy creating bad memories for Utopia, they have both proven to be happy to talk business in the middle of all sorts of compromising activities. 

Lovely guys. Really, bloody helpful."

I was thought not to care about others' problems, and I thought silently in myself each Mean City has it's own mean problems to deal with at times. So behave is the message...

Of course I was joking coz we are like a clockwork in the west coast.

Roxie had been listening to people speak for awhile. 

Once again unprotected words or loose lips have sunk a couple of ships.  There are no gray areas about that.  The words shared at that meeting has probably been shared quite a few times under loyal ears “fuck with one of us you fuck with us all” not that uncommon. Play on words has been the downfall of many.  Could have be completely misinterpreted who knows.  It just shames that you have to be as careful as to whom to trust, even in your own hood.

But at least some light was shared on the favour system.   There’s no set of principles or procedures, no organized scheme or method in which the annexed cities can utilize to stay in favour. Other than establishing a good rapport and relationship with the mothering city as GFC Bonkers has clearly stated, there are no other options. 

I encourage the annexed cities to do just that.  Las Vegas is a great example of what can be accomplished.  Doesn’t matter what transpired along the way, they used every resource to stay in favour and got where they are.