While Paxton Federation finds its feet, there have been a lot of opinions expressed and discussions about the future of the alliance. This has led to a loss of some corporations and members which is typical for any alliance that loses its space.
You see, living in and defending space gives an alliance a united goal and a focal location. Pilots tend to rat, mine, plex near each other and close to the station systems. When fighting occurs from a hostile gang or invading fleet, the alliance rallies (or hides) together. But once kicked out the ties that bind are broken and it takes a really strong leader with a solid inspiring vision to take the alliance from one defeat to a new initiative. I don't know of many alliances built that way (if any) so most either shed a few members tired of sov warfare and looking for something new, or fail-cascade altogether.
The problem is doubly difficult in alliance built around a leadership council mechanic. Democracy may work great in a static environment where most of the membership is happy, but it sucks balls when things are rough and everyone has divergent ideas on how to go forward. It gets even worse when basic membership gets antsy and wants to know what the leading council is thinking and talking about so that they can give their two cents (and its usually worth that much too).
Personally, I don't bother chiming in to these discussions. I trust my corp's leadership implicitly to make decisions that will work for me as they have done many times in the past. Besides, I'm not in the game enough to provide an informed useful opinion. Wherever we go, I'll adapt.
For those worried that Paxton will not recover from losing space in Providence, never fear. Paxton Federation will be back on the scene in null sec somewhere soon enough.
Posts
At this point we've only lost those that wanted to leave, if this keeps dragging out however we'll start losing those that would have preferred to stay. Delicate balance. Glad I'm not in charge.
ReplyDelete