佐々木 琲世 (
ex_adept136) wrote in
futurology2017-04-25 08:10 pm
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
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
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?