Roll20 uses cookies to improve your experience on our site. Cookies enable you to enjoy certain features, social sharing functionality, and tailor message and display ads to your interests on our site and others. They also help us understand how our site is being used. By continuing to use our site, you consent to our use of cookies. Update your cookie preferences .
×
Create a free account

Artemis Group By-Laws

1474838108

Edited 1474841550
COMPANY STRUCTURE A. Shareholders 1. Authority  All authority in the company resides in the shareholders. The primary function of shareholders' meetings is to set goals and policies for the company. Generally, these should be broadly focused and concerned with the company's long term performance and nature, but virtually any matter that affects the company can be decided by in a shareholders' meeting. For efficiency and convenience, the shareholders can vest specific portions of their authority in individual officers, appointed commissions or other representatives. 2. Shareholders' Meetings The shareholders will meet at least once per quarter (game time), to discuss issues and make decisions, review the company's performance, etc. The meeting will be announced (via Forum thread and PM) at least one week (real time) ahead of time. The primary function of shareholders' meetings is to set goals and policies for the company. Generally, these should be broadly focused and concerned with the company's long term performance and nature. Any shareholder can call an emergency meeting when important matters arise that the shareholders as a body cannot wait to address until the next quarterly meeting. Any two other shareholders must second the call to meet, and all possible time and means must be taken to contact all shareholders in advance of the meeting. a. Quorum: Whenever the shareholders meet, those who are in attendance shall be considered a Quorum, authorized to make binding decisions with the full authority of all of the shareholders. b. Votes: At any time during a shareholders' meeting, any shareholder may call for a vote on the subject under discussion, which must be seconded by another shareholder. Any other shareholder may second the call to vote. All votes will be decided by a simple majority (whichever option gets the most votes in passed), and each share equals one vote. Shareholders may abstain from votes, split their votes among any number of options, or vest any number of their votes in any proxy. c. Proxies: At least 24 hours (real time) prior to any shareholders' meeting, any shareholder can give any representative the authority to vote with any number of his/her shares. This investiture must be announced in the Forums and the terms should be as clearly and specifically as possible. d. Special Votes: Once a motion to vote has been seconded, any shareholder may make a motion that the vote be considered a Special Vote, requiring an absolute majority (over 50% of all votes cast) for the motion to pass. A motion to make a vote a Special Vote must be seconded and then passed by a simple majority vote. B. Corporate Officers 1. Board of Directors A board of three directors will be appointed to handle to important matters between shareholders' meetings. This board will include a total of three directors, who may or may not be shareholders. Two of the directors will be representatives of the shareholders and one will be a representative of the employees of the company (see C., below). All representatives will be selected by nomination and vote and elected quarterly. Should the shareholders feel that the Board is not serving the best interests of the company, they may vote to replace the Board members at their next quarterly meeting, or during an emergency meeting called for that purpose. a. Representative Selection: Any person may be nominated to be a representative to the Board of Directors by any member of the appropriate body (shareholders or employees), and must be seconded by another member of that body. Nominees have the right to refuse nomination for any reason. No person who is under censure by the company (on probation, suspension or otherwise officially reprimanded) cannot be nominated to the Board of Directors. All terms on the Board of Directors last one quarter, although individuals may be elected any number of terms. b. Shareholders' Representatives: Selection of the representatives will take place at each quarterly shareholders' meeting. Once all nominations to the Board are made, shareholders take a simple vote and the two candidates with the highest totals of votes are elected. In the case of a tie, a runoff vote is taken. c. Employees' Representative: Selection of the representative will take place quarterly, at the same time as the shareholders' meeting. Once all nominations to the Board are made, each employee of the company (as defined in C., below) is allowed to cast one vote for any nominee. The nominee with the most votes in appointed to the Board. In the case of a tie, a runoff vote is taken. d. Board's Rights and Responsibilities: The Board of Directors can be considered in session any time all three members of the Board are in simultaneous and direct contact with one another. It is the Board’s responsibility to design policies and make decisions that direct the rest of the company in how to implement the goals laid down by the shareholders. They can also provide input and feedback to the CEO, CFO or the Captain (see below), but generally do not generally otherwise take votes or propose motions except when they feel that the company's best interests are being harmed, or are in clear and present damage of being harmed by a decision or action being actively pursued or performed by an officer of the company. i. In the case of overriding the CEO or CFO, a two-thirds majority of the board may veto the CEO's decision in that single matter. ii. In the case of overriding the Captain, a unanimous vote of all three members of the Board of Directors can relieve the Captain of command, thereby leaving the decision in the hands of the next in command. 2. Chief Executive Officer The candidate who receives the most votes in the election of shareholders’ representatives acts as Chief Executive Officer of the company, who may make decisions on behalf of the Board and the company in all business and financial matters. In voting for a CEO, Board members cannot vote for themselves or abstain from the vote. The CEO's term generally lasts for the quarter, but the other two Board members may recall the standing CEO by passing a two-thirds majority vote to do so and agreeing to name one of their number to take the recalled CEO's position. a. CEO's Rights and Responsibilities: It is the CEO's duty to implement the decisions and Goals of the Shareholders and the Board of Directors on a day-to-day basis. This includes decisions regarding the allocation of corporate resources, hiring, disciplining and firing company officers, making binding agreements with patrons, customers, suppliers and any other matters that pertain to the company as a whole but are not covered under another officer's purview. b. Delegation of Responsibilities: The CEO may appoint one or more administrative assistants to help in his duties. These individuals will be considered company employees, bound by and entitled to all of the rights and responsibilities defined below. Administrative assistants can be vested with whatever portion of the CEO’s authority as he wishes, and such investiture can be temporary or permanent at the CEO’s discretion. Any CEO may choose to discharge any administrative assistant at any time, subject to the limitations in the Employees section, below. 3. Chief Financial Officer The Board of Directors will empower a qualified individual to act as the primary CFO of the company. The CFO is responsible for directing the fiscal functions of the corporation in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and the goals and principles set down by the shareholders and the Board, and in cooperation with the CEO. The CFO's term generally lasts for the quarter, but the Board members may recall the standing CFO by passing a two-thirds majority vote to do so and agreeing to name another qualified individual to take the recalled CFO's position. a. CFO’s Rights and Responsibilities: The CFO will plan, develop, organize, implement, direct and evaluate the organization's fiscal function and performance. He will track and report the company’s assets, manage accounts receivable and payable, oversee payroll and work closely with the CEO to maximize the company’s profits and credibility. The CFO has the authority to enter into short-term, binding agreements on behalf of the company in matters of sales and purchases. The CFO sets the base salaries and other compensation to all employees, subject to the approval of the Board of Directors. b. Delegation of Responsibilities: The CFO may appoint one or more administrative assistants to help in his duties. These individuals will be considered company employees, bound by and entitled to all of the rights and responsibilities defined below. Administrative assistants can be vested with whatever portion of the CFO’s authority as he wishes, and such investiture can be temporary or permanent at the CFO’s discretion. Any CFO may choose to discharge any administrative assistant at any time, subject to the limitations in the Employees section, below. 4. Captain of the Flagship The shareholders will select a qualified Captain to command the company’s flagship by simple nomination and vote. A Captain’s term lasts indefinitely, although the shareholders may call for a vote to replace him at any shareholders meeting. The Board of Directors can also temporarily relieve a Captain from command. a. Captain’s Rights and Responsibilities: The Captain is responsible for the safety and welfare of the ship, its crew, its passengers and its cargo. The Captain of the company flagship will also serve as Admiral of the Fleet whenever more than one company vessel is operating together. The Captain has direct command of the bridge crew and authority over the ship’s crew, and may assign them to duties and discipline them as needed. The Captain also has ultimate authority in all matters regarding the safety and welfare of the ship (qv.) The Captain is responsible to the CEO, the Board of Directors and the shareholders to command the ship in the pursuit of the goals and policies laid out by the company. b. Delegation of Responsibilities: The Captain may promote one or more junior officers to help in his duties. These individuals will be considered company employees, bound by and entitled to all of the rights and responsibilities defined below. Junior officers can be vested with whatever portion of the Captain’s authority as he wishes, subject to the limitation that no junior officer may have authority over any command officer. Any Captain may choose to demote any junior officer at any time, subject to review by the Board. When any number of crew are disembarked on an Away Mission, the Captain may name a crew member to command that mission and/or team and that Mission Leader will act as the superior officer to all personnel in the team. The Captain still maintains final authority of regarding the ship and crew, including remaining in command of Away Teams and Mission Leaders. C. Command Officers The Board of Directors will assign two qualified individuals to serve as Command Officers, directly responsible to the Captain, and subject to his orders and discipline. In each Command Officer will be empowered to act as acting Captain if the Captain is unavailable. These Command Officers will be selected by simple nomination and vote. In cases of emergency, when they both agree that the Captain is acting or behaving irrationally and/or against the interests of the ship, crew and company, the Command Officers are empowered to temporarily relieve the Captain of command and or duty, and to remand him to the custody of the Chief Medical Officer or confine him as needed. 1. First Officer The First Officer is second in the chain-of-command aboard the ship, and is responsible to advise and assist the Captain in the furtherance of his duties and in pursuing and protecting the company’s goals and interests. The First Officer may serve in additional capacities as determined by the Captain or the Board. 2. Second Officer The Second Officer is third in the chain-of-command aboard the ship, and is responsible to advise and assist the Captain in the furtherance of his duties and in pursuing and protecting the company’s goals and interests. The First Officer may serve in additional capacities as determined by the Captain or the Board. D. Crew Chiefs Crew Chiefs are nominated by the Captain and ratified by the Board of directors. Command Officers may serve as Crew Chiefs 1. Chief Engineer The Chief Engineer is responsible to the Captain and the Board for the maintenance, repair and operation of the ship’s mechanical and electrical systems, including informing the CFO when spare parts, tools and other material need to be purchased. The Chief Engineer is also the direct commanding officer of all designated engineers on the crew, subject to the approval of the Captain. 2. Chief Science Officer The Chief Science Officer is responsible for the oversight of scientific and medical operations of the ship and the physical and medical health and safety of the crew. The Chief Science Officer serves as the Ship’s Doctor or may delegate that responsibility to another qualified medical professional. The CSO is also responsible for maintenance and use of the ship’s laboratories and other scientific equipment and assets. The Chief Science Officer is also the direct supervisor of all designated researchers, medics or technicians on the crew, subject to the approval of the Captain. a. Ship’s Doctor: Either the CSO or an individual delegated by the CSO serves as the Ship’s Doctor. The Ship’s Doctor is responsible for the physical and mental health and safety of all personnel and passengers. The Ship’s Doctor is to monitor the health of all people aboard the ship, and has absolute authority in medical emergencies aboard ship. This means that the Ship’s Doctor can declare any crew member unfit for duty and can prescribe medical treatment and precautions for any individual or group of individuals based on medical need and the health of the crew and passengers as a whole. 3. Chief of Security The Chief of Security is responsible to the Captain and the Command Officers for the maintenance, repair and operation of the ship’s weapon systems and ordnance, as well as the maintenance and security of the ships locker and all small arms and personal armor. The Chief of Security is also responsible, in conjunction with the Chief Science Officer and/or Ship’s Doctor for the safety of the crew, passengers and of the ship in general. The Security Chief tracks and requisitions ammunition, ordnance and spare parts for all of the ship’s weapons and security systems and measures. The Chief of Security is also the direct supervisor of any crew specifically assigned as gunners, marines or security personnel, subject to the approval of the Captain. a. Confinement: The Chief of Security, under the command of the Captain, is empowered to hold individuals deemed to be criminals, enemies or otherwise dangerous to the ship, crew or passengers confined to quarters or in the Ship’s Brig and to take all measures needed to keep them there until such time as the Captain authorizes their release or transfer. E. Employees All crew aboard company-owned vessels and employees in company-owned ventures (hereafter collectively referred to as employees) are subject to the authority of the Company and Ship’s Officers as defined in these By-Laws. 1. Fair Treatment All employees shall be treated with dignity and respect to the extent of Common Law and the “Laws of Space.” All potential employees will be made aware of the conditions, duties, responsibilities and rewards of their proposed employment and must agree to those terms without duress. Artemis Group is an Equal Opportunity Employer (EOE) and will consider the employment of any qualified sophont regardless of species, gender, creed, nationality, place of origin, genetic variance, medical or cybernetic status, or soft drink preference. 2. Discipline Employees may be temporarily relieved of duty with or without pay by a superior officer for dereliction of duty, insubordination, unsatisfactory performance, violation of local or High law or breach of the terms of their employment. Any such actions are effective immediately, but subject to later review by the CEO or the Board of Directors. Employees may be terminated from employment by their direct supervisor or a higher authority for gross misconduct, assaulting a fellow employee, passenger, patron or superior officer, gross negligence, piracy, mutiny or theft. Terminated employees will be allowed to leave with any personal belongings at the next scheduled port of class C or better. a. Right to Appeal: In any case of discipline or censure, an employee has the right to appeal their treatment to the next higher authority in the corporate structure, as defined in these by-laws. While pursuing an appeal, however, the employee remains under the purview of the chain of command and the decision in question. The highest authority within any such proceedings will be the Board of Directors.
Except Astro Pop, That a known Zodani drink and runt will have nothing to do with no Astro pop drinkers
It should be noted that the assigned Ground/Field/Whatever Commander should have all the authority below that of the Acting Captain, and, when contact with the Acting Captain is unavailable, will be the exclusive leader of teams operating on the ground.
Added a clause in the Captain's Delegations section to allow Away Team Mission Leaders run missions but still be under the authority of the Captain, TT. Thanks for pointing that out.
I don’t think the Captain is the one to assign mission leaders; that’s a Company decision; the Captain only gets to veto it, and then be subject to removal if that becomes necessary.
Tenacious Techhunter said: I don’t think the Captain is the one to assign mission leaders; that’s a Company decision; the Captain only gets to veto it, and then be subject to removal if that becomes necessary. I disagree. The Captain is the commanding officer of the crew who have to go out and do the jobs. He's responsible for their welfare and their success or failure. I do think that the shareholders/Board/CEO should be the ones to decide on whether or not we accept specific Tickets, and they should be able to set mission parameters, and perhaps even rules of engagement (within reason). I would expect that business negotiations and such, perhaps even fact-finding missions and such might be reasonable exceptions, and would fall squarely under corporate jurisdiction.  When we're putting boots on the ground in potentially hazardous situations, however, it's got to be steam-lined, concrete command and control. 
1474928378

Edited 1474928457
I think I'm with Wolfen on this. The company board is behind the wheel when it comes to financial matters and ticket negotiations. In theory they delegated operational decisions to the one who knows what he's doing.  Same thinking runs down hill. The Captain would delegate mission and task leadership to individuals who are specialists in whatever task needs to be carried out. At the end of the day it would be a pretty straight forward affair. The proficiencies listed on our resume/ company file should really be steering who runs what show. if the Captain keeps making bum calls then the board could call him out on it. Or maybe veto him If they think he is making a terrible mistake... If they can organise a meeting and vote whether or not to veto him in time. We don't really want to wait for a meeting to adjourn evert time we throw a team together.
The trouble with that idea is that the Captain would then need to know so much more about ground combat in order to make that sort of assignment well; that seems like a really large skill-set, which means he would either have to be considerably more experienced than our characters are, or would be too jack-of-all-trades to run the ship well. I think it makes more sense to have the ground combat guys handle the ground combat stuff.
Tenacious Techhunter said: I think it makes more sense to have the ground combat guys handle the ground combat stuff. Yep. So he delegates the task to the one with the skilz. That'd go for all jobs the ship's crew is engaged in and not just combat. the board members weren't elected to be boss people on the ground. They were elected to represent shareholders and crew members during board meetings. Doing the Captain's job for him seems to be operating outside the board's sphere of authority.
No, the Board Members decide who bosses the people on the ground around on their behalf; what the Captain thinks about the person the Board chooses to do that is irrelevant, so long as that person isn’t unnecessarily endangering the ship by doing so; at which point, the Captain can simply not let that person back on board. While it’s important for the “Ground Commander” to utilize whatever support the Captain can provide from the ship, and to respect dictated extraction windows and the like, for the most part, the Captain of the Ship is better left to dealing with problems he has more immediate influence over; and with communications limits being what they are, contact with the ground crew is likely to be frequently lost, particularly with strong ECM around. I really think it makes more sense for the “Ground Commander” to be chosen by the Board, and have final say over ground operations; what happens on the ground is his responsibility, and the Captain is expected to help as often as the survival of the ship, an effective extraction, and a safe system departure, allow.
M'kay. I was just thinking along the line of is: Crew Chiefs are nominated by the Captain and ratified by the Board of directors. Command Officers may serve as Crew Chiefs is what you're proposing a change to this?
Awwww but power tends to corrupt, and dammit i want to be corrupt.
1475172782

Edited 1475173610
The whole point of the re-structuring of the company was to centralize and streamline our decision-making process. I'm personally against going back to the too many cooks spoil the broth model of not-getting things done. I take TT's point about the Captain not necessarily being a expert in ground operations (although think it's fair to say that Crow isn't completely ignorant in such matters), but I think Alby's posts have completely answered those concerns. Any leader's job is at least partially to delegate jobs to the right people. In any event, it's clear that we need to clearly delineate between the Board's and the Captain's purview's. In my mind, the Board and the CEO are specifically there to make decisions regarding the business end of things; setting corporate policies and goals, selecting and/or vetting the highest level company employees (ie, the Captain, Command Officers and CFO), deciding which jobs we take and setting any necessary mission parameters and priorities. I've always looked at it as though we were any other company, in which the Board of Directors aren't always right at hand, so the operational details and the real-time decisions fall to the Captain in terms of any military or mercenary matters.
Everybody who has thoughts on where we should draw the line between the Board's and the Captain's respective jurisdictions, please post your views and participate in this Discussion so we can make a decision a move on.
Its going to be an uncommon event when at least 1 senior staff/crew or board member are present. On operational matters the Its the captain in space and on the ship or shuttle, The ground commander would be assigned by the captain before the mission and the board would have the right to object but not over turn in the field or in battle. The board members only have operational authority if it is delegated to them by the captain or if they are they are the senior person on sight. Its my opinion Runt or Jeff be in charge of all ground pounding and security ops away from ship. TT be in charge of all thing spook related. The captain is in charge of the ship and overall mission planning.
SOP When more than half of the company owners are away from ship, The ship will go to a state general alert. In this state all ships personnel are to be armed and restricted to stations. If this state lasts for more than 4 hours a 50% stand down of crew for rest and food with stood down crew restricted to quarters and food brought to them via the robot. Passengers will be restricted to their lounge and cabin area's. Standing pilot roster in this event will be Izek, Captain Crow, Gerald. At all times when possible, Crew are required to be in their company issued Vacc suits, unless they have better armor that is sealed against vacuum and EMP .
1475198085

Edited 1475198203
Honestly, all the ideas VIC listed I agree with, but if Jeff were to be a leader. He would only like to be the leader of a rifle squad(I will roll up the NPC's if needed) because his experience with them. I will train Jeff in atleast Military Tactics 0 in case my rifle squad is so far away that Runt or Crow can't cover me. EDIT: I forgot to mention that instead of TT, Jeff or Drex should be in charge of "spook" stuff. Jeff for on planet security, Drex for on ship security/research.
1475206588

Edited 1475206623
On board with what vic said. I guess what's important is that we have a chain of command based on expertise and not a handfull of loose links.
1475210000

Edited 1475225387
How about this as order of rank on Ship. Captain First Officer Second Officer Chief Engineer Chief of Security Chief Medical Officer Chief Science Officer If we get lower than the we are screwed any ways.
there is no chief medical, only a ships doctor and chief science. Also Chief security above engineering.
1475260348

Edited 1475261166
Sebastien proposes a motion to give the Board of Directors/CEO complete jurisdiction over business day to day and log term business dealings, including negotiating and deciding on all Tickets, purchases/speculation, contracts, hiring and firing, setting salaries and other compensation, and all of the powers and responsibilities already noted in the By-Laws above.  The Captain/Command Officers will have complete command of the ship and crew, including both shipboard and all other operations involving the ship or crew. Essentially, the Board and the CEO decide what we're going to do and our guiding policies, the Captain and the Command Officers decide how to get it done. Does anybody Second the motion? or Offer a competing version? ********* As for Chain of Command Corporate Shareholders Board CEO (CFO) Operations (Shareholders) Captain First Officer Second Officer (Mission Leader*) Chief of Security* Chief Engineer* Chief Science Officer* * Crew Chiefs are each considered the direct supervisors of the respective staff. Ship's Doctor does not have a place in the Chain of Command, but has authority over everybody on the ship or otherwise under Artemis Group's care or employ in terms of all medical matters. Sebastien proposes we vote Yea or Nay on the above command structure. Does anybody second the motion?
Jeff seconds Sebastien.
Thanks, Jeff. Which motion? Or both?
Jeff seconds Sebastien, so I second both. (But Drex is annoyed he has little power compared to the the rest of the people. But he won't make these feelings known. Remember the Leader genetics giving him a biological need to be a "Leader")
Buddah said: Jeff seconds Sebastien, so I second both. (But Drex is annoyed he has little power compared to the the rest of the people. Well if you think about it, Drex has absolute authority when it comes to science matters. If science and research are all he really cares about then he is the absolute boss in the field that "actually matters". And if we ever go out on a research trip (like that Dentus one) he's probably going to be the one running the show on the ground.
Drex isn't leaving the ship if that world has the 2 lowest tiers of law level. Unless it's a TL0-3 world, he's not nearly as worried on undeveloped worlds.
1475291065

Edited 1475291096
Wolfen said: Sebastien proposes a motion to give the Board of Directors/CEO complete jurisdiction over business day to day and log term business dealings, including negotiating and deciding on all Tickets, purchases/speculation, contracts, hiring and firing, setting salaries and other compensation, and all of the powers and responsibilities already noted in the By-Laws above.  The Captain/Command Officers will have complete command of the ship and crew, including both shipboard and all other operations involving the ship or crew. Essentially, the Board and the CEO decide what we're going to do and our guiding policies, the Captain and the Command Officers decide how to get it done. Does anybody Second the motion? or Offer a competing version? Jeff Seconds the Motion Both Jacob and Sebastien Vote Yea, in favor of defining the jurisdictions of the Captain/Command Officers and the CEO/Board of Directors as detailed above. 20 Votes Yea As for Chain of Command... Corporate Shareholders Board CEO (CFO) Operations (Shareholders) Captain First Officer Second Officer (Mission Leader*) Chief of Security* Chief Engineer* Chief Science Officer* * Crew Chiefs are each considered the direct supervisors of the respective staff. Ship's Doctor does not have a place in the Chain of Command, but has authority over everybody on the ship or otherwise under Artemis Group's care or employ in terms of all medical matters. Sebastien proposes we vote Yea or Nay on the above command structure. Does anybody second the motion? Jeff Seconds the Motion Both Jacob and Sebastien vote Yea, in favor of the Motion to designate the chain of command as detailed above. Shareholders, please post your votes. Once everybody votes, I'm planning on moving to end the Shareholders' Meeting. 20 votes Yea
Jeff votes all 12 on both, Drex votes 2 on the first, but abstains on the chain of command.
Sorry, but I'm not sure what it means for shareholders to be on the chain of command when it comes to operations. Makes sense on the corporate level, but in operations it makes it look as it shareholders can issue commands on an operational level. Was that the intention? Does someone actually above the captain in the chain of command simply because they hold shares? Or is it more of a figurative thing - like saying that what we do we do for our shareholders?
Your position as a share holder does not give you authority in the chain of command. Your authority comes from your position in the chain of command.  On the ship and on Mission its either the captain in charge or who every the board has put in charge of the mission is the boss. The captain is always the boss of the ship unless he is seen to be unfit or incompetent by ether at least 2 board members or 2 senior officers of the ship. Your share holder status has no sway over operational matters, neither does being a board member.
Opps sos Alby i just saw what you meant and i agree, share holders should not have to say in a operation. And the second contradicts the first by having share holders out rank the captain, when the first 1 clearly says that in Operational matters the captain has ultimate authority. So both Izek and Gerald vote against both motions. 7 votes.
1475429494

Edited 1475429589
Sorry, I didn't mean that to be confusing.  The reason that I included the Shareholders was to point out that all authority comes from the Shareholders. Period. (That's why they are in parentheses). It definitely does not  mean that the Shareholders can throw orders around under any circumstances. Shareholders as a group can decide any matter involving the company via a vote at a Shareholders' meeting, but not off the cuff or during operations of any sort.
See what you did to our brains with them bendy type lines. Stop straining our brains pleeeeeeeaaaaassssseeeeee hehehehe
Ah, (parentheses) ... Alright then. *Kayleb submits a double barrelled vote supporting the motion* 
OK. So both motions pass with flying colors.
The point about the Captain vs. the Ground Commander is that whoever is Ground Commander at a given moment is up to the board, and not up to the Captain. And since the Ground Commander only has authority over ground situations, that shouldn’t matter to the Captain anyway, except to the extent which the Captain can order the ship to act in a support capacity to the troops on the ground. The Captain still has the authority to decide whether or not to land, and whether or not to let the troops board... but the idea that the Captain should have any active authority over how the activities of the ground team are conducted is a bit wrong.
1475777844

Edited 1475778001
Tenacious Techhunter said: The point about the Captain vs. the Ground Commander is that whoever is Ground Commander at a given moment is up to the board, and not up to the Captain. And since the Ground Commander only has authority over ground situations, that shouldn’t matter to the Captain anyway, except to the extent which the Captain can order the ship to act in a support capacity to the troops on the ground. The Captain still has the authority to decide whether or not to land, and whether or not to let the troops board... but the idea that the Captain should have any active authority over how the activities of the ground team are conducted is a bit wrong. The Discussion was closed and we voted, TT. If you must go on about it, please don't do it in this thread. I was hoping to make this thread specifically for a clean copy of the actual By-Laws, not ongoing discussion. And certainly not for revisiting settled issues.