佐々木 琲世 (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
ex_adept136) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
futurology2017-04-25 08:10 pm
ex_adept136) wrote in futurology2017-04-25 08:10 pm
text | un: Sasaki
[Haise has talked with several teammates about the lack of cohesion, and how difficult it is for all of them to coordinate. It was something he'd meant to discuss, or perhaps encourage others better suited, to bring up when they had some down-time. In the wake of a rather heated debate he chose to sat out on, he thinks maybe conversations about how they unify can't wait]
It seems that some of us may be feeling a little hot under the collar after recent events. Since I am an advocate for mercy, and am only alive because as much was extended to me when others may have argued against it, I don't want to touch on moral disagreements. Our stances will naturally differ, because our organization doesn't give us any unifying principles to abide by.
As a member of the CCG, I had very set guidelines to follow. Those weren't all things I agreed with, or felt right about. But they did maintain order, and did keep people safe. They made us an effective team, and more than once it's come up with colleagues here that we might benefit from that.
This was something I'd hoped might come up on Oska, when people had time to relax, but considering the circumstances...
Would any of you be interested in opening that discussion? That is, talking about our backgrounds, where we're coming from, and what we believe. If we start there, surely we can find a way to work together. If we're constantly at odds with one another, that isn't good for anyone. When I first joined, that division was certainly in place, but those I disagreed with still took the time to speak with me, and we did have common ground. I'd like to suggest that, as a team, we try to find that...for all our sakes.
Edit: Although I spoke of my own background in the example I provided, by no means am I suggesting that everyone do the same. Most importantly, we need to establish where we stand on issues we're often confronted with in our line of work. These things would inevitably show in our actions, so speaking on personal matters is not necessary for discussion.
What each of us believes and what course we're inclined to take is what I mean to inquire about.
[ooc: Naturally, thread-hop/jack as desired]
It seems that some of us may be feeling a little hot under the collar after recent events. Since I am an advocate for mercy, and am only alive because as much was extended to me when others may have argued against it, I don't want to touch on moral disagreements. Our stances will naturally differ, because our organization doesn't give us any unifying principles to abide by.
As a member of the CCG, I had very set guidelines to follow. Those weren't all things I agreed with, or felt right about. But they did maintain order, and did keep people safe. They made us an effective team, and more than once it's come up with colleagues here that we might benefit from that.
This was something I'd hoped might come up on Oska, when people had time to relax, but considering the circumstances...
Would any of you be interested in opening that discussion? That is, talking about our backgrounds, where we're coming from, and what we believe. If we start there, surely we can find a way to work together. If we're constantly at odds with one another, that isn't good for anyone. When I first joined, that division was certainly in place, but those I disagreed with still took the time to speak with me, and we did have common ground. I'd like to suggest that, as a team, we try to find that...for all our sakes.
Edit: Although I spoke of my own background in the example I provided, by no means am I suggesting that everyone do the same. Most importantly, we need to establish where we stand on issues we're often confronted with in our line of work. These things would inevitably show in our actions, so speaking on personal matters is not necessary for discussion.
What each of us believes and what course we're inclined to take is what I mean to inquire about.
[ooc: Naturally, thread-hop/jack as desired]
no subject
As such, I don't claim to be entirely forthright nor ask for it.
My intention is to open a dialogue. What each of us may wish to say, I can only imagine will depend on individual views. We are a very large squad. But if we don't talk about our perspectives and what we agree on, I don't see us working as a unit. If I have worded it poorly, that's my mistake, but we're expected to determine our own course as a team and I hope we can begin with finding out where we may agree.
Trust is something earned with time, and I hope I haven't suggested otherwise. If even this is problematic, how would you say we should approach the matter?
no subject
Secondly and relatedly, I don't personally want to talk about my personal history in public over the network, simply because I don't trust ALASTAIR and I don't want it preserved for all time in public anyway. Hence, part of where I'm coming from is obvious: I have trust issues. [#itsajoke]
And then I suppose beyond that, to agree with all participants not to shame or judge those who don't participate. I'm not sure how you would enforce such a thing, and it does worry me, because I feel those who would choose not to participate in such a thing have the greatest reason to fear being honest with others. But to at least have a verbal statement to that effect would help, I feel. It's not mandatory, you're not the Audentes pariah if you don't participate, we aren't going to immediately assume you're evil.
I appreciate you clarifying, by the way, and being willing to listen to input. It's a credit to you.
no subject
Like you, I don't entirely trust the organization we've become a part of. And there are some topics that are both intensely personal and require a great deal of trust to even broach; I'll make a revision to my posting here, assuming we have that function, to clarify what I was asking. If it came across this way to one person, surely there are more. I'm just glad it was pointed out to me.
Having said that, I think all of your suggestions are sound. That does sound like an ideal forum for discussion, especially where we've been divided on issues we're often confronted with for a long time now. I'm unsure whether I'm the right person to arrange such a meeting, or even to have begun this conversation, though it does seem that being able to speak candidly in-person would benefit everyone. If we can't safely make our stances known, it would be difficult to work together as we're intended to, especially with such a large team.
Do you suppose such a meeting could be arranged, assuming after the dust settles in Oska we have some time to ourselves? I know that's assuming a great deal, all things considered, but sooner (if possible) strikes me as better than later in light of recent events.
no subject
I know why you didn't before, but after everything, I feel like a lot's changed. I feel like we understand what they're doing better.
I don't trust easily. But there's no perfect way to go about what we do. And I think understanding where that mistrust comes from will help us. After all, it sounds like you trust the people you work for back home. Does their way of doing things make you wish ALASTAIR was the same?
no subject
As to the rest, I would say your guess is on the mark. I believe Kittypaw does what they can to support us, but ALASTAIR on the whole does not. As a CCG investigator, I am provided with as much information as possible that is pertinent to my mission objectives. I've been both trained and prepared, given logistical support and teamed up with other units as deemed effective. In short, I am set up for success.
[Putting aside how he is very often thrown at powerful, high-risk opponents solo...]
ALASTAIR does not take into account that our squad is not like others. We had no awareness of what we were brought into, and often, no awareness of other worlds. Training is not supplied, and often, we're exposed to very basic (for typical teams) information only when we stumble across it. This has often caused setbacks. Not to mention, what we pick up on, fresh recruits are not provided with unless we recall what they wouldn't be told and fill them in. In other words, we're not primed in the same way at all.
I believe they mean well, but I place my trust where I feel it is warranted. I don't begrudge them this, but my understanding is that it's been well over a year, and these circumstances remain.
no subject
I think that Team Kittypaw is administrative, but they can only do so much. That's why we have to take it upon ourselves. And for the most part, we have. I think we've done a pretty good job of it.
Truthfully, if there's anyone we should be wondering about, it's whoever broke off of the original Zymandis in the first place. Unfortunately, I'm willing to bet that whoever that was is now dead. The files we found in Perdition's Rest were there for a really, REALLY long time.
So, I think we should be wary about ... TIM, I guess. And whether TIM is really helping us. Or if that machine CAN help us, you know?
no subject
An organization of this size should be entirely capable of providing basic training, support, or materials to let us train new recruits ourselves now that we've muddled through. Whatever their intentions are, it doesn't change that their practices aren't necessarily in the best interests of those rifted into their ranks.
A senior associate once told me of a time when our squad was "tested" by ALASTAIR, forced into harsh conditions with their supplies cut off. That endangered civilians and non-combatants, and did not include any training prior to its execution. There's a level of thoughtlessness to such measures that I can't abide. You can't test people on something they haven't been prepared for in any way and expect positive results...but they were "graded" on it nonetheless.
I don't mind disagreeing on this matter; your opinion is as valid as mine. But I don't think I will ever entirely trust any group that puts people in those conditions and doesn't attempt to make adjustments when they struggle.
The branch of the CCG to which I belong is in Tokyo, and that is our jurisdiction. Despite being so much smaller than this organization, we manage to provide the support, education, and training required to perform. That includes people who start at widely disparate skill levels. If we could, I see no reason that an organization of this size and scope could not. So that's why I feel the way I do.
no subject
Right now, we know more about what Zymandis can and has done than what ALASTAIR has done. Every time I've tried to find something wrong with ALASTAIR, I've seen differently. I guess that's just how it is.
Your branch may be smaller, but I assume it also controls the type of people pulled in. ALASTAIR can't control that. Otherwise, wouldn't they want an entire team of people like you and me?
no subject
At least in that case, we were briefed on some level.
I'd say it's important to know what both have done. We know some differences in how they operate, but I'd like to have more information. One thing I think we all agree on is that we're opposed to Zymandis, regardless of the details of our perspectives.
As for the CCG...that's a yes and a no. Most of my associates were orphaned, and consequently fell under the organization's care and tutelage. Personalities and ability vary widely, in ways that aren't always anticipated and must be compensated for. That, I suppose, is part of why I value structure as I do. Measures are in place to bolster, support, and assist those who need it.
no subject
He doesn't think anyone would disagree with that.]
I think the real problem is that the current members of ALASTAIR won't know what happened in the past without some real digging. That includes people on Team Kittypaw. If they had us looking for that before, that means they don't know. They had to learn from that information as much as we did.
When you say orphaned, does that mean they specifically looked for orphans?
[Keith, being an orphan (or so he thinks—he's really not sure these days), figures that's even sketchier than Voltron and ALASTAIR put together.
But that's where judgment comes in to play.]
no subject
I don't entirely agree that we learn things as Kittypaw does. For instance, we didn't have access to the data files for quite some time, but this is clearly generalized information ALASTAIR members would usually have. Information that includes data on our support team, for one thing.
They don't look for orphans, but rather, they take them in. Those children are provided for and given a general education, and if they choose, they can go on to enroll in the Academy for training to become investigators. The choice is up to them, when that time comes. Another matter of how and when information is distributed...it could use work, whoever handles that.
[The CCG is a lot of things, but at least this much isn't a terrible practice.
At the same time, those children have often been orphaned by ghouls...]
no subject
[Maybe he shouldn't be saying this in public, but it is Keith. Besides, he already accused one person of wanting to do that. Might as well ride it out.]
It's good that they don't force the orphans on that path. But it may be a good path for them to take anyway. Going to the Garrison was kinda like that for me, anyway.
[Albeit with less explained fighter pilot stuff. Because why.]
no subject
[He doesn't want to believe that of any of them. It takes a unique sort of monster, or someone caught up in some hideous mob mentality, to embrace that kind of credo]
Quite a few of them do choose it. Some go on to become investigators in the field like me, others take positions of logistical support. Is this Garrison of yours similar?
[Since they're sharing and all]
no subject
[Keith has put some amount of thought into this, but it's probably partly because it does sit close to home.]
It's different. I mean, I guess some people become teachers, but most end up there to participate in space exploration. And most people have bigger support networks than I ever had.
no subject
Maybe someone would be that way, but until that day comes, I'd like to think we're all a little more discerning.
[That's his way of putting it, at any rate. He's known some pretty awful people but still]
Exploring space... It's not very common at all, where I'm from. Did you have a squad back home, or people to work with? I'd take quality over size anyday.
no subject
Then again, isn't having faith in ALASTAIR the same? Keith is beginning to think that his theory is really the issue here.]
It might be something simpler than what we're saying. Maybe teams get disbanded early on. But ours has lasted long enough to be a known entity. I haven't been transferred to another team to know if they know stuff already, you know?
[Keith realizes that Pidge might know. Hm. Well, it's not that important.]
The Garrison had a lot of people, but the expeditions were smaller. It was all about resources. There would be a fighter who also excelled in piloting and two scientifically-geared minded people on each mission.
I was obviously the pilot type. I never went on a mission. Not before I had to leave the Garrison.
no subject
[It's hard to gauge terribly much about ALASTAIR, for all its lack of structure and consistency, at least in his view]
Our teams are often structured by strengths and skill, back home. But it's a little more varied than that. Then again, we weren't journeying terribly far.
When you say you left, do you mean when you were brought here?
no subject
I do think that sort of meeting could be arranged, although it would have to be done with some thought to various complicating factors. Privacy and group size are the most significant issues, to my mind. Eighty people is far too many to engage in a conversation like this. Ten is too many. Ten groups of eight might be doable, although of course some people won't want to participate.
Privacy will depend on how Oska looks once the dust settles, as you say. I'll think more on it; there's only so much one can enforce in a group this size, because people gossip, but there are ways to at least mitigate it if we're cautious. And then the final factor is ensuring that the groups are evenly distributed with respect to outlook. I feel there will be far more people in the idealist camp than any other, for a number of reasons including the aforementioned fact that I believe those with a more pessimistic or even realistic viewpoint are less likely to be willing to subject themselves to condescension and ridicule by the majority. Even so, all that can be done is that we make an effort to adjust for such discrepancies and make things as even-keeled as possible.
Would you be willing to work together with me on this? I realize you said you aren't sure whether you're the right person to lead on this, but your response has been among the least vitriolic and most thoughtful, and frankly there are a lot of people on this team I don't trust to be thoughtful, much less unbiased, on this matter.
no subject
Where I come from, my stance was pretty firmly in the minority and I couldn't speak freely. ALASTAIR was the first experience I had with voicing my objections openly, and I was very surprised that my associates at the time were as willing to discuss differing views as they were. My stance was not the prevailing one, and decisions had already been made, but they still invested that time. You could say that experience influenced me.
Balancing out smaller groups like that does sound sensible. It can be very difficult to speak up if one feels alone among people who they expect will judge or disagree strongly. In such cases, a differing view can be (or at least feel) actively discouraged, and there's been more than enough to go around. Given that, I wouldn't blame those who wouldn't be inclined to participate, or are reluctant to do so.
Were we all of one mind in all things, I imagine we'd be weaker for it. It's those differences that give us an informed perspective. For instance, your reply helped me see my words from another angle and clarify them. If I can be of any assistance, I'll do my best to contribute to making it happen, when the time comes.
SORRY FOR THE DELAY ON THIS, was having trouble articulating this point
For what it's worth, I think that it's experiences like yours--being able to speak your mind for the first time, here in Audentes--that allow even the most injured people to heal. I would like this to be that sort of place for at least one person before I leave. I would like for that good experience to multiply exponentially, if possible. That's my goal, my dream for my time in Audentes, if nothing else. And I do owe you for your willingness to listen, because now I'm one step closer to making my dream a reality.
no subject
And I think that's an admirable goal. To make a positive difference like that is no small thing, whether for one person or many. Having the will to do so and a thoughtful mind strike me as invaluable in the service of an objective like that, so I'm sure it's possible. If ever I can do something to assist you, please feel free to call on me.