The Rebel Faction

go from a farm worker to a Sith Knight for only a few fleeting moments.

Wait.... did you just call me a farm worker? I'll let you off just because of the delicious pun on the word 'fleeting'. Yum.

That's an interesting idea about having an impartial 'arbiter'. Perhaps we should give that a trial run? Make a thread (I say make it outside of the 'normal' TRF timeline, so that wins or losses don't count for anything and we can see how the system works) where the Empire attacks the GC or something. Allow all writers on each side to join in and the arbiter decide how things go in an OOC thread.

Anyone else up for that?

The idea of an arbiter of sorts would only be called into action when a dispute arises. For example, when two groups are engaged and the final decision is contested. If a massive battle is to take place with both sides bent on victory, then the arbiter would step in and say Side X wins, Side Y withdraws. Or Side X loses, Side Y withdraws. In the case of a thread where both side are cooperating to make things go smoothly, then no such decision is needed and thus no interference needed. In the event of say, a regular takeover, the arbiter would have perview to say "populace rises in insurrection" or "propagdanda efforts fail" or "planet receptive to conquest" etc etc. That way while most of our threads will continuen as planned every know and then even the greatest of us will have our noses bloodied. Of course the arbiter will be bound by reality - a planet of Ewoks may gallantly resist a legion of the Empire's best troops, but they will be slaughtered all the same. Or the planet will be glassed. However, he could say at one specific engagement, the ewoks outsmart of trap a few walkers and soldiers and tarnish their reputation, etc.

Just a thought. Something to add a little uncertainty, a little spice.

"Colonel Brigade":

---

The only episode I've seen is III, so I'm not all that much of a Star Wars fan.

Oh. Do watch the other films before making too many comments on their quality, there's a good chap.

"Colonel Brigade":

---

Sure, Star Wars may have sucked somewhat, but that's because people like this guy are implanting these thoughts into our head.

Ahh... that's the reason, is it? Still, I don't think anyone was suggesting that it sucks, per se. Just that it's not perfect, which I think we all agree on.

Oh, and thanks for the smacks, buddy. 'ppreciate it. What with Telan calling me a farm worker and our friend the Colonel slapping me silly, I'm not sure why I bother

Oh, that's right... I don't.

- -

Wes, I still hold that having an arbiter could make for some interesting reads. I don't do much fleeting, though, so I guess that gives me no right to comment. That said, I'm sure the unexpected twists would compel some writers to produce even better work.

I'm sure noone's suggesting that a third party opinion should be imposed on a writer against his will - both writers would have to agree, I believe.

That's why I suggested an out-of-timeline trial thread: To try out the idea and see how it works and whether an arbiter can be impartial. Noone loses anything if it goes wrong, and it gives everyone a chance to see if it's as bad (or indeed, as good) as they think.

And years before that. And before that, back on Ezboards. The idea isn't new; it's just one that keeps popping back up.

Continuing the hijack of the thread, yeah an arbiter could theoretically work, but to some degree the staff have worked as such in the past. And finding one everyone agrees on is difficult. I can remember throwing around the phrase "fucking staff bias" a lot back in the Corellian OOC threads/AIM conversations around that time. I'm more reasonable now, but when everyone is playing to win, agreeing that the impartial arbiter is right in saying you lost isn't easy.