American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

_________________
General Mark Nelms

3/2/XX/AoC "Blackhawk Brigade"

Union Military Academy Instructor

_________________
General Mark Nelms

3/2/XX/AoC "Blackhawk Brigade"

Union Military Academy Instructor

General Nelms,
Mark,

Thank you for the quick reply! <salute>

I do recall the early days of the Club prior to Don Adams development of the DoR. He has done us a tremendous service and saved us many many hours of work maintaining records and reports. I do consider your service in that capacity as service to the entire Club. Thank you!

I applaud the fact that you see your membership within the ACWGC as being of greater significance than your affiliation with certain military group. I feel that is a vital characteristic for our future Club President. I'd invite you to take every opportunity that you have to get a closer look within the Confederacy... the proverbial walking in the shoes of the other man.

I was being sort of silly about the whole switching sides thing but I wanted to see your reaction and the reasoning behind your perspective. I feel that there should be no limitations on our CLUB MEMBERS participation on either side of the Club. As you stated... there is often an ebb and flow in the interest of in particular era of history, etc. If I feel like I want to fight a battle as a Union player one battle... and as a Confederate player in the next battle... why is one battle considered a maneuver and the other a battle? Are we not Club Members first and foremost... and then members of specific military groups after that? Why can't we have the freedom to have a Confederate profile and a Union profile if we desire. Wouldn't it promote greater freedom for the individual player and stronger friendships on both sides of the Club?

Your thoughts, Sir..

An interesting idea but I think it would be a record keeping nightmare. Also, how do you maintain the role playing aspect of the club if you are trying to maintain two profiles, one for each side. Take away that aspect of the club and do we then just become another ladder club? Are the point differentials between a battle and a maneuver that important that you see the need to change the structure of a club that has worked well for over 10 years? Like many ideas it raises as many questions as it may solve. I would suggest you write up a proposal that would spell out how the entire thing would work and submit it to the Cabinet and see what happens.

_________________
General Mark Nelms

3/2/XX/AoC "Blackhawk Brigade"

Union Military Academy Instructor

Thanks for your replies thus far, sir!

I think I only have one more question to ask - and I think this may interest many in the Club.


Where do you see the ACWGC in five years? Also, what can we, not just the Cabinet/President but ALL the Members, do to help the Club?


Thanks in advance for your input and best of luck in the election!

_________________
General Mark Nelms

3/2/XX/AoC "Blackhawk Brigade"

Union Military Academy Instructor

General Nelms,
Mark,

Thanks again for your quick response! <salute>

Actually, the DoR is fully capable of handling a Union and a Confederate profile for each member. There is no difficulty at all. For example, it could be as easy as NelmsUSA & NelmsCSA. To the DoR it would be the same as having two separate individuals as your points wouldn't be lumped together under one profile. Those members who opt to have two profiles would then have the choice when they register for new Game ID's. They would be free to use either profile dependent upon which side they decided to play for that particular game. Club Members who wish to have only one profile on one side of the Club would certain have the right to do so.

The DoR can also be used to track medals. Ken Miller (USA) has used the DoR to track individuals medals & awards for years by entering them into the DoR under the Award Points section that is available to Administrators. This is great because if a person loses his hard drive... as his entire record is preserved permanently in the DoR.

Also your comment about maintaining the role playing aspect of the Club is unfounded. Do you have any difficulty playing a Union Officer in the ACWGC and playing a French Officer in the Napoleonic Club? Of course not. If you can do it in two Clubs you can also do it in one. I am fully capable of role playing a US and CS Officer at the same time. After all, it is just a role play... I don't REALLY think I am a Reb or Yank Officer do I? No, I am simply role playing the Confederate position in one game and role playing the Union position in the next game. If any of us actually think that we are Civil War Officer's... then I would suggest perhaps you are taking the whole role playing idea a bit too far.

I'm not concerned about point differentials. But I am concerned about the individual Club Members FREEDOM to play from either side or both sides of the Club in an unrestricted fashion. If I get on my Playstation to play Medal of Honor... I can choose to play an Axis profile or an Allied profile. Why can't we do this is the ACWGC? When I go to Burger King... I shouldn't have to buy a Whopper every time I visit. Maybe I want to have the Crispy Chicken sandwich this time.

I have been in the Club since it's inception. As in any organization there are always high points and low points. There are many many positive features to our Club. That's why I am still involved but we could do more! I remember days when the Club didn't have a Cabinet and that the Union & Confederate Chief of Armies pretty much ran things. If you have two good quality CoA's that work together cooperatively... things run great without a Cabinet. But if you have two CoA's that don't cooperate well or if one of them isn't pulling his weight... it's easy for an imbalance to develop that can skew things. (I'm not knocking any CoA's past or present... just giving an example.) So I understand having a Cabinet with more individuals involved creates greater balance... provides more people to share ideas and to carry the weight of leadership.

Having a Cabinet or no Cabinet isn't really the issue as it is only a form of Club organization. But I will openly say that in my opinion the Cabinet has not always served our Club well. I feel the voice of the individual Club Member has been squelched and that we have no real voice of our own within the Club. I grow weary of the usual excuse... "you write up a proposal that would spell out how the entire thing would work and submit it to the Cabinet and see what happens."

I have submitted proposals and I NEVER see what happens because the proposals are discussed behind closed doors and I have no idea of what the arguments for and against those proposals are. Then latter on I get notice that the proposal was passed or rejected and that is all I hear. I have absolutely no idea if a rejected proposal could have been passed with some minor modifications or tweaks.

If you make a presentation in the business world... you are in the video conference room to present your ideas, to explain them and to hear the arguments for and against them. And then a decision is made by the powers to be. That is not happening in the ACWGC. That is why this election of a Club President is so vitally important to me. I want to ensure that our new Club President will represent the Club Membership and just not his own military group. I want a Club President who will not simply be a Chairperson who counts up the votes and declares that this proposal passes with a 3 to 2 vote. I want a Club President that will fight to make sure that the individual Club Member has a voice and that their voice will be heard whether he agrees with the proposal being brought before the Cabinet or not.

As you can see... I'm rather passionate about the subject. I mean no disrespect to you or any current or past Cabinet Member. I apologize if it sounds like that. I am simply stating that I would like to see some changes within the Club and feel that to follow things as they have been done over the past 10 years would be a disservice to our fine Club.

Your thoughts, Sir...

Roger,

Over the past years (or at least since I joined in 2010) I haven't had any issues with the Cabinet failing to respond to things. I have seen them fail to pass proposals but that's their right to deny proposals as they are elected for that very reason. My two cents.

Having worked with Mark on the Cabinet before I know him to be a man of his word and one always willing to communicate and answer questions.

I know Mark can answer for himself but I wanted to speak up and say that whatever happened "in the past" isn't how things have been going over the past few years. I have every confidence in Mark or Bob to keep up that spirit of communication and openness that I first experience with President Mallory when I joined.

_________________
General Mark Nelms

3/2/XX/AoC "Blackhawk Brigade"

Union Military Academy Instructor

Thanks Mark for your answer.
I am not entirely satisfied though (and the same with Bob's answer), so I will give it another try.

I understand what you say about participation of officers which comes and goes. You are right but the trouble is that a new coming officer who won't be able to find an opponent (or enough opponents) will probably leave the club very soon. and it is also the case for veterans (I know what i am talking about, that is exactly what I did with my previous club which I left after 10 years because I couldnot find enough games). and I am not satisfied to read that it is just coming and going.

The promotion of gaming, of making sure every officer plays what he wants to play, from the old timers to the new and discreet youngster should be one of the main goal (if not the main goal) of the club leaders.
but I could not find any mention in your original statement or answers.

I also have the feeling that the current cabinet/leaders have slightly forgotten about this and that running and ruling the club has become more important than promoting gaming within.
No disrespect at all. I am perfectly aware that personal commitment is really high within the club leaders and I thank them for this. It is just that the club (as an entity) appears to me to be the ultimate goal and that the promotion of gaming is just one task among others, as important as making sure the club rules are correctly written.
I would hope the priorities of the next president and cabinet will slightly comes back towards the promotion of gaming as we shouldn't forget that this is a wargaming club and that the ruling should IMHO come second or third in the TO DO lists ...

One specific example : Tournaments within the club are a good way to promote gaming.
I am so surprised for a club that is so well structured with so many internal rules that there isn't a topic which makes the list of the current ongoing tournament.
I made my own which is probably not correct :
RBCT
AotS seasonal maneuvers
Gator alley / Hancock division match
CSA Brigade Honors
Lt cup
there used to be a commandan'st Cup also but I feel it has been abandonned.
why isn't there somewhere a list for them and the way to apply?

When I joined the club 15 months ago, I was ready to take on 10 games in parallel and participate to any tournament ongoing. I was just amazed that except the Lt's Cup, I could find no info about the current actions ... I did find my games, but what about a new officer coming in to see what's going on here and unable to find information. some officers might ask. some will just go.

why isn't it also in the cabinet TO DO list to make sure that there ain't too many tournaments or maneuvers going on in parallel ?
Last year, the AotC had talks with the AotM for a divisional tournament. we had to cancel because there was not enough players on the rebel side. Apparently there was some CSA maneuvers which already occupied a lot of officers. If we had known about it, we would have postponed the idea. It is just amazing that there is no club wide communication about all these actions just to let the members know about them, give ideas to others etc ...

I would appreciate to read your thoughts about the promotion of gaming within the club and its position in the cabinet's list of priorities and your opinon about tournament handling.
Thanks

_________________
Lt. Gen. Francois Chatain
CO XX Corps and Adjutant, AotC, USA
Red Badge of Courage Tournament Deputy Director

Thanks for clarifying your question. As far as promoting gaming here is the relevant club rule:

1.2. The ACWGC encourages, promotes and facilitates game play among its members, but does not impose any standard of frequency as a requirement of membership. The club recognizes that the personal schedule and obligations of each member will dictate both the number and frequency of individual games undertaken.

The Cabinet can encourage folks to play but in the end the rule is right, people's personal schedules and obligations will determine their gaming frequency. Encouraging folks to play is something that should start with the Corps/Division commanders as they will be the ones to see who is playing and who isn't. I can see where having a Tournament forum could be a good idea to keep everyone informed as to who is doing what. If elected I'll see that becomes an agenda item for discussion.

_________________
General Mark Nelms

3/2/XX/AoC "Blackhawk Brigade"

Union Military Academy Instructor