Semantics, clarity and our future



  • We are all bound by our natures – both empowered and limited. This was particularly obvious last night.

    There’s the nature of our sense of independence. Whether we’re anarchs by political inclination, or individualistic by blood or calling. Perhaps some are here in reactionary rejection of the Tower. No matter – it’s hard when you have fled, broken away, rejected or ignored the intense bonds of the Camarilla, to turn back to adding layers of limitations on oneself.

    Also, we have the Beast, and calls of the Blood that drive us, as well as personal rivalries. We can be many things – allies, lovers, business partners, rivals, enemies – but we ain’t friends.

    Maybe last night was biting off a bit more than we can chew. It’s not in our collective toolbox to hammer out previously-ignored restrictions and restraints to place on ourselves in a collegial manner.

    Maybe we need to modify how we approach things.

    We all got stuff that bothered us, I imagine. I was dismayed by what I thought was an unclear, ill-defined presentation of points. Votes came, and the things being voted on were changed in mid-vote. By the end, it broke down such that people couldn’t tell what a ‘yes’ would mean and what a ‘no’ would mean.

    So maybe we tried to do too much, too soon. But I don’t think we should quit.

    Doing this – bending my neck to laws and restrictions as I never did before, actually conspiring – okay, planning – on adding more….man, that’s rough. Hell, sitting still in the same place for more than a few weeks at a time has me feeling itchy non-stop. But I’m trying.

    I’ve found things to believe in. Things – and people - to support. I’ve taken on obligations and responsibilities. I’ve laid claims and try to claw out a patch of turf and range. I believe in you, Felicia – and what you’re trying to accomplish, even if I ain’t precisely sure what it all is. But I think I’ve seen the primal drive behind it, and I’m on board.

    But that don’t mean I won’t challenge what I disagree with, or narratives that I think are incomplete, or just plain horseshit. The Animal in me rises up and roars, and the Beast in me growls back. I know all y’all got similar drives, only a different nature.

    We should start with smaller bites, first. Hours into wrangling and haggling, and I’m sure my fangs weren’t the only ones ready to drop.

    So maybe we should review how we approach this. And I DON’T mean adding still more rules. Make things simpler, rather than more complicated and heavily layered. After all, what’s the rush? What’s next on the agenda? Is there a list of things just begging to be done? I haven’t seen it if there is.

    Keep our agendas simple, but clear and thorough. Discussion can start on the board, and continue in council. And since we agreed on transparency, that’s gotta be restated.

    Anyway, that my bit.

    • Hector


  • Hector,

    You’re 100% correct, we’re all coming from different backgrounds. Some are refugees from a sect so alien to our modern understanding of society that it’s honestly difficult to express its horrors.

    I’m gonna say something controversial here - protocol makes shit simpler. So while my suggestion might look rigid, I intend it as a form to simply procedure. Take for example the modern “check list”. It was implemented by the USAF after a test flight of a B-17 crashed because an pilot missed a setting. Pilots, known for their collective egos, railed against them. Called them insulting to their training and experience. But they saved countless lives, and the concept became so admired that it spread to medicine, and has become a common part of our lexicon.

    There is no shame in having a procedure if it helps keep us from falling apart. And yeah, I know, I’m a politics nerd, but I think I’ve got a point.

    If someone can suggest something else, I’m all ears.

    Sincerely,

    Emmeric



  • Some light reading on cognitive distortions for your amusement:

    https://psychcentral.com/lib/15-common-cognitive-distortions/



  • I have some additional topics that I would like to put to Parliament, especially as we did not finish laws.

    I will start a separate thread for those. I will note that both agenda topics were solicited prior to the meeting as well as general discussions on the contents therein. The record is here within these communications.

    So, I support continuing doing what we already were and encourage each to engage appropriately so our time together is productive and concise.

    Tucker



  • Yeah, they were posted. And, given from the direction the meeting went, hellaciously incomplete.

    I think “doing what we already were” kinda spoke for itself. On a related topic - do we post for a replacement for Yves, or wait - and hope - the frustration will pass?

    • Hector

  • Lead Storytellers Administrators

    So I’ll respond to both threads here and keep the other one clean for the notes to be put together. I got a few thoughts on the meeting and wanted to share them with y’all before we go much further. There’s plenty of animosity flying around and people who have a serious dislike for shit that’s gone down. I ain’t asking no one to forget everything, but I ask y’all to cool your jets right now for this topic. The council be bigger than any person, any animosity, and if we don’t wanna be like all the other anarchs and watch shit fly apart, then we’re gonna need to at least get through the setting up of laws.

    Firstly, I owe y’all an apology for upping and quitting right away like that. I coulda just walked out like a couple of others, but I didn’t. That wasn’t right to do, and so that’s what I’ll say on it. I coulda handled it much better than I did, and should have done. More on that a bit later.

    Secondly, don’t be thinking that one disagreement with Tucker is the entirety of what got my goat, it wasn’t. There were a few different reasons for me getting pissed at shit, and though I don’t feel a need to make things worse by giving war and peace, I do think it is worth pointing out to be fair. Sure I didn’t like the idea that I thought was proposed… as I think the rest of y’all felt. But speaking to Tucker about it later maybe it was something of a misunderstanding. It don’t matter if you believe that or not, at this stage we gotta take shit at face value and move past it to get to the end goal of establishing our rules. They will last long after the rest of us is dust.

    Thirdly, I wanna propose a possible solution to the mayhem we ended up finding. What someone says and means ain’t always understood, that much is clear. I think voting out of place caused a lot of confusion and so we might wanna consider that when the call is made, it’s made with us asking first: Anyone got anything else to say on this or we moving to a vote. Then the answer is a simple yes, no, or whateverthefuck we want to use as positive or negative. And I was guilty of this too, so don’t think I’m blaming anyone. We new to this and all got our backs up against rules like the tower has. But we also need to be clear on what we voting on, and that wasn’t the case. I also think we should be letting Felicia moderate it from now on, so she can keep us on track and deal with this better than those of us caught up in the heat of a debate.

    So thems just a suggestion, but maybe we can work it into something to be making our lives simpler. Depends how you all feel about that.

    Fourthly, and back to my first point, I quit last night during the meeting. Ain’t no way around that and when a man says he gonna do something then it needs to get done. Now I spoke to a few of you and y’all seem to think maybe it was a bad idea, and truth be told, I kinda agree with that. I got a feeling I can help get this shit off the ground at least, and owe something to the people who voted me in here in the first place. So if you agree to it, I’ll rescind the quit and leave it there at that. If you don’t, then I get it and ain’t gonna be upset over it. I said it, nobody else, and holding someone to account is fair here I reckon. So I leave that up to those remaining.

    Regardless of the outcome of that, I still think we got to a point with two laws and some rules settled. Let’s not row that back and open up a can of worms, cuz it was hard work just getting to that stage. One more meeting should be enough to hammer out the other details, and if we can put animosity to one side until that’s done, then Crucible will have something to be proud of.

    • Yves.


  • I am in agreement with you remaining.

    Tucker



  • I am also in agreement, Yves.

    But, on another point, and this is something I have attempted to articulate above in many different ways, I will try another to see if it sinks in.

    I have stood and fought with the Blade. With Cassie. I am not a fighter, and I was out of my element, but I trusted Hector (including after he threw a knife at Tucker the night before a fight) with my life.

    In this arena, the Spine is more at home. This much is obvious. What I’m asking is that you guys try and stand with us, so that we can build something stronger than a house of cards. We need to stand side by side, and figure this shit out, because it’s more important than petty grievances.

    I left the Camarilla in vague terms over a decade ago. Two weeks ago, I slammed the fucking door. So like it or not, you’re stuck with me. So, let’s fucking try and work together.

    • Emmeric

  • Storytellers

    I, too, would prefer you remain.

    • T

  • Storytellers

    I’d like you to stay.

    -Bettie



  • Yves should stay.

    -Cassie



  • All I’ve seen so far is the same old horseshit, except with more vampires doing it.

    Everybody’s got their own fucking narratives that they want to preserve. Some are bumrushing votes, even as the item that was being voted on was changed. Folks asked for clarity, and instead got “3 for, 2 against!” or whatever. Several times I pointed out that votes were being rushed even as amendments and changers were added with almost no discussion.

    That just ain’t gonna work. At. All.

    This was supposed to be something different - not amplified of more of the same. But that’s all it is.

    And Emmeric, are you really suggesting we let Spine dominate the council and its procedures? Are you fucking insane? Frankly, so far Spine is the problem.

    It has got to change. What’s being built so far is worse than what was before, and pursues none of the ideals put forth. All that’s happened is a magnification of the personal bullshit that went before. As I said before, maybe it’s just our nature. But there’s precisely zero point in signing on to something that is the same old corruptions in a brand new bow.

    I have zero faith in the process so far. Zero faith in what’s been accomplished. Zero faith in where we’re pointed to.

    The more things change, the more they stay the same. It’s pretty damn hard to see a path forward.

    • Hector

  • Storytellers

    What do you propose instead?

    We could perhaps try acting like adults and working for the good of the city, putting petty personal bullshit to the side for the duration of Parliament business. Maybe that is too much to hope for, though Lord knows it is what I was trying to do with the proposals I made. I might have lost my temper (again, don’t assume my reasons) but I left the room before taking it out on anybody and have continued to try to work with y’all for the good of the city, because frankly I think it is a worthwhile endeavor and want to see it work despite the inevitable teething problems and drama that we need to stop with.

    So what do you suggest we do if you think the current situation is untenable and no proposals are workable? Constructive criticism is productive. Saying everything is pointless and unworkable is not.

    • T

  • Lead Storytellers Administrators

    Seriously, what the fuck? Corruption? No faith? What exactly you expecting from this? We got a general process of how to run the meeting agreed. It needs fine tuning, but it was agreed. Democratic style. Then we got two law points agreed. Nobody was unclear in the end on what that bit was. The bit after, sure that went to shit. But other than that despite our natures we got through some things. The first time we trying it, this be painful. I don’t see no corruption, just a bunch of licks trying to hammer shit out. The alternative is nothing, which was what we is trying to change anyway. A few people got pissed off and left. Maybe they felt a bit of them rising up, maybe not. I did what I did too. Feelings can be intense. Maybe next time you be the one in that position. Ain’t nothing gonna change if we don’t give a bit of leeway on that happening.

    So basically, what Tia said. What do you think is a better way to get things done? Or you want out of the idea in total? I made a couple of suggestions, and ain’t as Spine. I’m me. Not the Guild I’m part of only. Emmeric worded shit badly, but his idea is trust us to give experience we got over you. Ain’t nothing wrong with that, you got a brain to see what makes sense and what you don’t want to happen. You got the same voice as every other person. And Felicia to ask if you ain’t sure, as you seem to respect her at least.

    I wanna work with ya man to get things fixed up, but need meeting in the middle.

    Same goes for everyone else. We can focus on this job or be petty and make it much harder. Then we all gotta spend more time with each other than we need.

    • Yves


  • Yves,

    Thank you for clarifying my words, and intent.

    • Emmeric