Editing Newsletter/Spring 2007 (section)

=== Q8 ===
'''''Is it possible that the membership of Star Trek Freedom could eventually be too large and cumbersome?'''''

I don't think so, the more the merrier but I guess Anthony may have other ideas as more players may mean more work. [[User:dolphin20pl1|Alan Reading]]

Conditionally no. What we would have to do though after we hit a certain level would be to start being selective in who can join. We would need to tighten requirements and insist on a certain level writing competance as well as performance. -[[Federation Starships|Ken]]

As the site grows, we will have a need for more ships to accomodate more players. Good captains are hard to find. They tend to be very special people, with the talent requirements of addressing disputes agreeably, imaginative storylines, and flexibility. I thank God we have such good captains. But only time will tell. -[[herbalsheila]]

I agree. A new ship brings with it the chance to expand the game. [[User:Nymes|Nymes]]

Here at Freedom there is a nice, friendly, family feeling. A lot of bigger games just don't have that. On the other hand if we can keep that feeling going even if the game expands and we add more ships - and of course Tony and the Council don't mind the extra work that will entail!! - then expansion would work out OK. But yes, I do think in general it is possible for games to become too large and too cumbersome. -[[User:Rivers|Liz Geuken]]

I have considerable experience with family-oriented organizations that grew from “small and cozy” to “huge and mighty” within a few years due to their own success. A few are ripped apart by that, but the good ones are not. Those tend to simply and naturally divide into smaller subgroups, delineated mostly by the preference of the members. These subgroups need not become cliques if the larger group has a solid base of respect and friendliness in the first place, and breaches of the code of acceptable behavior are not allowed to stand unaddressed. In the end, if well-managed, the larger the main group, the more smaller, family-like subgroups appear from which to choose. Thus, everyone can hope for a better fit. 

In a group that is too small and claustrophobic, the chances of its operation being seriously hindered by one or two difficult individuals is much greater than in a larger group. The larger group with different subgroups allows personalities that mesh well to gravitate together, and those that clash the space they need to drift apart, so that all can continue to participate without constantly tripping over one another.

So, my best solution would be similar to the one that has worked for my fast-growing but close church family. The door is open to all, but the emphasis is on the subgroups, and on keeping the infrastructure shored up to match the growth. (In this case, that means we have lots of new study classes, deacons, elders, etc, springing up like Missouri morrel mushrooms on a treestump by the crick.). The goal: No one gets left behind or lost in the shuffle, even in a congregation that has gone from about 300 to way over 700 in less than a decade. And we don’t even take applications or have an academy! If FBBC, St. Joe Mo, can do it, so can ST:F. 

This expansion could take place in the form of adding more ships. But as Sheila has wisely stated, good Captains can be hard to find. So, perhaps new sections of infrastructure could be set in place. Could the council members use assistants, with specifically designated duties, as delegated by the individual council member? Perhaps the Academy could benefit from some assistants who just screen applications, and then report back to the Academy CO, or something like that? We have the talent available… why not use all of it, and let our site grow, as her success deserves? -[[GrannyGM]]