- Location
- England, unfortunately.
- Pronouns
- She/They
[X] Plan: De-Stress to be Refreshed!
Look, whilst there's not a ton of limits in what orgs can do, their inherent focuses are going to naturally incline us to make certain decisions. As a corp, we can do martial actions that are illegal, but since it takes a lot more work than it would because of the red tape, we'd be strongly disincentivised from doing it if we had another choice.
As for org comparison, whilst in general it seems good, I think I've noticed something... and that's that you consider 'Criminal' and Corp' to be as focused as your Archaic idea, instead of being borader categories in their own right.
Which fair, I've probably not done a great job of considering myself, but it is something I notice.
Archaic isn't the only option that gets to choose how to structure itself. For corp, what kind of corp - Sure a corp can technically be do anything so long as it's about making money, but it'd be easier to transfer the skills and time we've put in by acquiring buisnesses with similar portfolios. For criminal, what's their driver? Some are in it to make money, but some are ideologically driven, which means they probably aren't going to be inventing some new strain of ring.
Those factors are going to cause the org in question to self select. If we did a news focused corp, we'd likely be able to swing a lot of people who want to make a living doing stuff like investigative journalism. If we make a more ideologically driven criminal group, we'd get more people with that ideology and less invested in personal gain, who'd just joing a gang where doing that would be easier.
Okay, again, it seems I was bad explaining things... probably not helped by me writing that particular one at like, 10pm at night needing to get up at 4:30.To be quite honest I did not intend to be this argumentative about what sort of org CD should run, but you've got me riled up. Mostly because I've read your argument as "they totally literally can't do X" and that in my opinion misrepresents the things.
Like if I would read your argument literally it would look like arguing "the news group _obviously_ can't run a fast food chaing" and in previous message you've wrote thing like "corp is inherently stronger a sit can buy the news company and produce propaganda".
Look, whilst there's not a ton of limits in what orgs can do, their inherent focuses are going to naturally incline us to make certain decisions. As a corp, we can do martial actions that are illegal, but since it takes a lot more work than it would because of the red tape, we'd be strongly disincentivised from doing it if we had another choice.
As for org comparison, whilst in general it seems good, I think I've noticed something... and that's that you consider 'Criminal' and Corp' to be as focused as your Archaic idea, instead of being borader categories in their own right.
Which fair, I've probably not done a great job of considering myself, but it is something I notice.
Archaic isn't the only option that gets to choose how to structure itself. For corp, what kind of corp - Sure a corp can technically be do anything so long as it's about making money, but it'd be easier to transfer the skills and time we've put in by acquiring buisnesses with similar portfolios. For criminal, what's their driver? Some are in it to make money, but some are ideologically driven, which means they probably aren't going to be inventing some new strain of ring.
Those factors are going to cause the org in question to self select. If we did a news focused corp, we'd likely be able to swing a lot of people who want to make a living doing stuff like investigative journalism. If we make a more ideologically driven criminal group, we'd get more people with that ideology and less invested in personal gain, who'd just joing a gang where doing that would be easier.
Last edited: