OBESE

That is a very good advice that I feel many are not taking advantage of. When it comes to bringing concerns to the appropriate staff by hierarchy, often it is very hard to get replies from higher ranked personnel, which does not really make it an effective way of dealing with problems. You do not sound like an asshole and I see where you coming from, but at the same times I would like to not put such information publicly for the sake of those I might accuse of being bias as administration - therefore being unprofessional. If administration wants to see or hear more specific examples, I can do that with all the proof needed. I dont want to be an asshole either at the end of the day. I am not talking about having opinion on situations where it is not really unreasonable opinion. You have not experienced it, but sadly I have and of course noone will say "yeah, I was biased" and will just deny it. As I said to the previous person - no one will openly agree as it could be that they are being biased even without realising it. Also it is hard to prove that someone is biased as it's a decision and you have no evidence how that decision was made. Recently there was a punishment given and in appeal similar situations were shown where the people reported got only warnings and the appeal was still denied. When the admin was confronted with the examples the answer was - I did not make that decision, so I cannot comment on it. I made this one and I stand by it.

((Hit me up if you want colab with Black Cassidy haha))

This could help you a lot for the beginning when it comes to scripts and commands. I am not 100% how up to date it is, but most of the stuff there is what the server has. If anything then only few commands could be missing on that list.

@tyson1904 I dont blame you for trying. I have tried as well with several topics about stuff that I think should be changed. But most of the times it just goes with few people agreeing, few disagreeing and then the whole thing dying anyways. Sometimes it feels like the suggestion or discussion part of the forum is just for your own amusement. The police loosing guns things and being able to loot them has been discussed multiple times. Also it has been discussed that PD should have to put in money for their guns as part of buying equipment. Gangs being at war with each other does not happen because there is this controlling power on the server that everyone is afraid to go against. Some smaller groups try to, but it is never successful because at the state that this power has put themselves in, it is just impossible. Also the server rules are not really supporting a war environment and in the end every war ends up being fought on forums via reports and has nothing to do with IC. About drug prices, I dont really care as I have never liked grinding, especially in the drug labs. I would say that the reason why legal jobs bring more money, as Mining is one of the last jobs added, is to make the civilian rp more attractive. The issue tho is the fact that you dont have to be a civilian to do it. So as a criminal you do whatever you want, as a civilian you are limited. I personally have not seen police with hakuchous but I have not been online for a month now. If that is a thing then the reason for that is because a lot of criminals like to use these bikes as they are fast and hard to catch. Many police officers were annoyed by that and were complaining, so probably the higher ups allowed to use the same type of bike to be able to catch these fast riders.

There is no common sense in a lot of things from players on this server. So sadly asking them to have necessary rp to get the guns is probably too much to ask.

Everything you said is spot on. I've been staff in projects myself and I know how hard it can get and how unpopular the positions are especially when you're issuing bans and warnings to people. So making sure there is not even a chance of COI is very important imo.

Adude, they have cars worth millions...ofc it's gonna be prioritised around vehicles than lore and authentic rp ;).

I speak from my own experience. In no way I have tried or actually insulted no one with my OP. Besides when it comes to "conflict of interest" in real life, in organisations and businesses it is not about not trusting the person or not being confident in their professionalism. Such thing exists to not even go that far where someone could feel like there has been conflict of interest. When a faction handler tells the faction that he will make sure they are disbanded on their discord due to IC conflict - that is a concern for me. When an admin deals with a report and then ignores possible outcome changing evidence that could punish a member of a group that admin is part of - that is a concern as well. These are not the only things I've seen. But yet again I will say it - Im not pointing at everyone and Im not gonna point at no one specific, just letting everyone know that such thing exists and been witnessed.

Let me start of with quoting what is "Conflict of interest" from a wikipedia. So, now to the question - why there is no such thing as conflict of interest on this project? Sure, there are some instances where it is practices, but from my own personal experience it usually happens when one of the involved parties actually point out the possible conflict of interest and asks for anyone else in charge to deal with the situation. Rather than that, we would see that there is no considerations for it. Please correct me, if Im wrong. Why do I have such belief that conflict of interest on eclipse project is non existing? Due to several reasons, that I have seen myself and been part of. For example I have seen where admin would take up a report that is against a group in which admin himself is involved with, with one of his characters. I even have proof where a decision has been made in favour of the group and when new evidence was presented to the admin, that potentially could change the outcome of the report, the evidence was denied. I've seen where faction handlers are people representing a rival organisation. I've witnessed favouritism from admins sides when it comes to connections and acquaintances. When it comes to being the deciding party of a conflict of any kind, outcomes fairness is always based on the deciding party's integrity and professionalism. Do we have that in this project at all times? As I mentioned, that is not the case. I am not saying that everyone is breaching this "conflict of interest" and I have seen very professional members of staff where they have shown and proven that they are not bias and does their job as they should, but yet again there are instances where it's opposite. I personally believe that there should be rules (if there is not one, that we are not aware of) when it comes who is assign to what tasks and duties to have every decision and feedback with no bias opinions that would be looked at as conflict of interest. Feel free to discuss this matter down bellow in comments...

Oh boy I pre-ordered, so waiting for the drop on 4th. ((Ooof actually pretty good. Young Dro started sooo sick and then when the beat picked up the flow just went somewhere. For me it was out of rhythm. Loved the Devils work and thought that was your best by far, but then realised it was actually a bit edited version of Joyner Lucas lyrics ;( ))

Creativity is appreciated - so what?

This is how I imagined you when you said "drives away smirking"

I believe the person did a relog and it did not change nothing.

That was what we were hoping for, but unfortunately if you're not looking for trouble in this town, the trouble will find you.

I appreciate your input and in no way I am trying to push exactly my way or anything like that. Im just trying to offer way of how we could have proper gang wars without it becoming a war of reports. Also giving gangs opportunity for war tactics and approaches.

I would like to think that common sense would be used and gangs would not be able to just declare wars, because they can. That's why a strong rp reason has to be presented. Any reason for retaliation in terms of a war. Feels like you think that all you have to do is to post declaration of war without no concept of why are you doing it and no rp behind it and you will be able to run around dming people.

Have you been part of an open war? Have you seen forums during the war? Do you know how those wars were won? It is what you say it is - pass on DM. That is exactly what it is because at the current state the server rules in no way support war environment on the server. Instead of American Football it is Flag Football (google if you dont know what it is). And in flag football the the people who are faster has advantage over those who have weight. If the full tackle football would be allowed then those who are fast could still dodge and run away, while those who have weight could tackle the faster players if not careful.

This suggestion is exactly for the fun and further rp. Besides it gives both sides option to retaliate during the period of the war and if your character choice is to go criminal, then you're not a victim. Drugs, money, violence is what you're signing for and should expect. Dont want this to happen? Then make sure your leadership makes better decisions, does better diplomacy and it goes both ways - for big and small gangs. I do see that bigger gangs would declare wars, but I doubt that they would continue doing it after few tries and in return work more on diplomacy as big gangs should, because they would have to keep in mind that a big target is easier to hit than a small one. They would learn to not underestimate organisations. For big organisations and especially to official organisations there are other ways to win such wars, like depleting enemy's weapon stash, find their suppliers and cut it off, considering that they are the only ones that can import weaponry. True that I did not touch on the benefit of winning the war. That is up for suggestions as well, but that could be done in-game via diplomacy again. If one side wants to surrender they would have to meet up with the other sides leadership and agree to terms of the winning party. The only thing that would not be allowed is to ask to disband the group. There have been requests from organisations to pay to other party to drop out of war, the same tax system right now etc. The requirements should not be unrealistic. Also I would imagine there would be at least another month of something like NLR where the loosing party is not allowed to target the winning party in any criminal way. Surrendering right after the declaration would mean that you're taking up on consequences of the loosing party, such as fines, taxes etc. The winning party would have to agree to cease the fire and agree put down the demands that the loosing party has to fulfil in IC first and then OOC. Another way to go around it is to have the same template of winners demands to everyone, set by the administration. For example in the Declaration of War form it would be part of every form that winning party receives for example 400k fine or 8 weeks of tax 50k p/w and 2 months of non-aggression-agreement from the loosing party. Also if the loosing group decided to disband the leadership still has to pay fine of 100k (or something like that). Disbanding a group and creating a new one would not be allowed for let's say the same 2 months to make sure it is not used as looser punishment evading.

I feel like you missed vital parts of the suggestion. No smart leadership will ever approve declaration of war if it means that their people can be killed as they all would have KOS on them. The most important part is that a) you must have a valid and good rp reason why you have a conflict that has come to the point where you want to declare a war. and b) Admin has to approve or deny the declaration of war. If the leadership of the other organisation is not around for 2 weeks, then administration can decline the declaration based on the fact that the opposite party have not responded to the information about the declaration of the war against them or have informed their absence for a long time.

Greeting everyone! I read what was stated in the original request and what has been said in the discussion and I would like to add my point of view and personal experience to all the story. Let me first start of with the original request to remove the current Chief of Police. I do not agree with this request because I do not believe that removing him will change anything that could not be changed with him in the position. As probably one of the biggest business tax payers of this city LSC could be able to request a formal meeting with LSPD's leadership and discuss the issue and see what could be the solution to either stop it occurring or to lower the occurrences of such events to a minimum. Now to the second point that I would like to touch upon is the Los Zetas. Before I became a government official I had a simple job as a mechanic at the same place we are talking about now - Los Santos Customs. At that time I just started my job and was still a trainee. New to the town I did not know much about it and while just being a nice person and having a simple conversation with some people who ended up being part of Los Zetas, I gain my first and only experience I needed from this organisation. After the incident with the Los Zetas members I was not fine with it and I made my decision to refuse service at LSC to any Los Zetas member. I did not care if my colleagues do it, but I was not about to service them. You could feel the influence of this criminal organisation as the management of LSC approached me to speak about the fact that I've been refusing service and I did explain them why. Although it was well known fact that LSC does not support crime in the city in no way, they still did not feel like fixing vehicles that will be used in criminal activities, counted as supporting crime. So before they could fire me I left. This leads me to what Mr Gamble has said here about his character and reputation with other businesses. I must say that also the way your organisation presents yourself in eyes of the public brings you reputation as well and it has been a long and well known fact that friendly is not in Los Zetas vocabulary if there is no benefit. And it is true in this situation as well as we can see the issue is the fact that this organisation has been banned from the business due to their own members actions and now they are doing what they do the best - harass the business. Kind Regards, Matt Avens, Head of Career Development, Los Santos City Government

Following the recent discussion made on the forum there is clear issue with the current state of the server, it being good 70% criminal, and the conflict situations between various criminal organisations. For those who are not aware of the discussion here is a link: Gang Wars The main issue that is addressed in the discussion is the fact that when it comes to conflicts between the gangs, there is not much you can do to the opposite party. Looking back on the previous wars on the server it always leads to being OOC war aka forum report war, rather than staying just ICly. Been part of these wars and from my knowledge none of them were won ICly, but mainly via deportations of specific people. So how do we deal with this and make sure that in the server with such big criminal organisation presence, we can have purely IC conflict that does not go outside the game and ruin the overall game experience to so many players due to a misread situation, animation bug and other type of ban reasons that we often see. There is an easy answer to it, that does not require much adjustments to the server - Declaration of War. This idea comes from the browser game that we have all heard about and maybe even played - ikariam. They have something similar to what we have of DM rule, but they call it Bashing rule. This is what the "Bashing" rule states: Basically same as for our DM rule it says that you cannot attack somebody if you don't have a valid reason. Both of the games do not allow people to blindly ruin someones game-play. But the "Bashing" rule has an exception which states: So how do they make sure that the alliances are at war with each other? Easy! They have Declaration of War. This is how it works on ikariam: ========================================================== Suggestion: With all this being said I am suggesting to open up another forum section that is purely for declaring wars. Same as you have for transfers, there must be a good roleplay reason to declare a war and the war has to be approved by administration to make sure it is not used for pure DM reasons. The war can be declared only by the leadership or one ranked below the leadership (ex. Boss and Underboss) Both parties do not have to accept the war, the declaration can be one sided, but both organisations leaderships have to be aware of the declaration of war. When the declaration of war is approved by the administration the DM rule is lifted to all the members of both organisations. If a new organisation joins an existing war, they have to make their own declaration of war thread to be approved. War is considered done when one of the parties surrenders, both of the parties agrees to end it or 30 days after the deceleration of war has been approved. After 30 days one or other organisation can file another declaration of war if they have good enough reason to continue the war. All the DM reports between the organisations that have an active deceleration of war are declined. Any other type of rule-break still applies, including FearRP, MG, PG etc. Example of the Declaration of War Form: Name of the representing organisations: Greek Lions Name of the organisations declaring war to: Macedonian Greats Date of the declaration: dd/mm/yyyy What is your reason for declaring the war?: There has been many occasions when these Macedonians have attacked our organisation and our members. We have tried to deal with it peacefuly, butthe attacks keep happening and it is time for payback as we do not take these attacks lightly. ========================================================== I know that some of you might think that this server will become another GTA Online if such thing will be allowed, but I hope that the opposite would happen and organisations would actually try to solve the problems they have between each other to stop the bloodshed. Besides it would also open up new fields of role-play, for example mercenary business or anything that sorts. It is time there are consequences for joining gangs and anything close to gang affiliation.

That sound about right because our type of game play does not put us in that much interactions with police.

Well, let's see how you boys do. I hope to see authenticity of a street gang and a lot of N words from you haha.

Wait we gonna have 2 Bloods factions? EDIT: My apologies, did not see the other Bloods deleted the thread!