[Kerry Malone]

I should reiterate that all this change is; is that we're not requiring people to have passed an exam before they can join our fleets or volunteer.

If divisional leaders still want to utilise exam graduation as a filtering method for recruitment of CL4 or even CL5 candidates, that is their option.

FEO has, for quite some time now, not bothered checking Academy course graduation on completion of PCR requests. Nor is it a factor we consider when we're discussing if someone is suitable for a CL5 position. We trust that our command teams are capable of determining if someone is suitable to work with them or not, and have done all necessary checks/discussions/decisions prior to our involvement.

Having someone who is amazingly enthusiastic, good work ethic and willing to put in the effort to bring about great events/great changes - but being rejected because they didn't pass an exam, sets a very low tone. Likewise, having to pass an exam where the answers are actually in your welcome PM before you can join one of our in-game fleet/guilds is likewise very daft, and as has been said already - detracting.

I think the changes made are positive ones, and the exams are still there. Just whether you want to take them or not

[ilyesufo]

before i join the UFP i failed in the orientation exam more than once so i think removing it will help people get into UFP easily

Failing in that exam more than once will make people lose their interest in joining

that's why i support removing it
But for CL5 positions thats need more than just exam
its the future of UFP we talking about

And again that's only my opinion



Sent from my PGN605 using Tapatalk

[Noram]

It's nice to see the exams becoming optional.
The only downside I can see is that the entrance exam was essentially tests to see whether people actually read the Code of Conduct and at least looked at our rules...
Still, I think it's for the best.

[Ariotex]

I echo part of what Three said, I happen to like taking exams (like em even more when failing it has no repercussions). I do not, and likely never will aspire to an Officer position with UFP, mostly because I just plain don't have the time needed to do an even mediocre job at it, but I went ahead and took all the exams just because they were there.

Anyway, having no vested interest one way or the other I see someone taking the time and commitment to take, and pass, the exam helps to show that they are serious about the position they are trying to get. Again, just the way I see it but if someone can't/won't take the small amount of time needed to take the exam how are they going to be when it comes to the much greater amount of time required by the position they are wanting ?
I am kind of prejudiced by my Military service. Promotions to a position of actual leadership and responsibility also required attending and passing the requisite leadership course for that rank. The biggest thing about those courses wasn't the course material itself, it was the fact that the courses are deliberately designed so that all but a very small percentage of people had to spend most of their "free time" studying and prepping for the next day or there was no way they were going to pass. Why ? Because doing an effective job in that leadership position also meant that your free time no longer really existed as a good percentage of what you had to deal with was going to be outside of normal duty (work) hours.

Then, to be my own devil's advocate. I spent a number of years as an instructor, both in the Military and then as a Defense contractor and it is amazing how many extremely intelligent and capable people suddenly have problems spelling their own names correctly as soon as you mention "test". Although I was never one to "teach the test" as it's called, by the time a test was given every student had been asked every question on the test numerous times (along with a bunch of other questions not on the test) and it was quite surprising how often a student that always had the correct answer when asked during training couldn't even get 50% of correct answers when you put a test in front of them, much less the 70% required to pass. Of course I also had people who could ace a test all day long but were totally incapable of actually putting that information into practice....

Taking the time to take and pass the test helps show a persons commitment and willingness to spend their own time on something. However, failing the test does not mean that person wouldn't be able to do the job, it could just signify someone who just plain has problems taking tests.

Anyway, I personally feel that anyone being considered for the higher positions in UFP should be someone who's been around long enough, and been active enough, that the current leadership already has a good idea of whether or not they would be a good fit for the position. The only examination that is going to really mean anything one way or the other is the hands on exam of seeing how well they perform the job.

[Alandrel]

The only downside I can see is that the entrance exam was essentially tests to see whether people actually read the Code of Conduct and at least looked at our rules...

Speaking with years of experience from other web-based RPGs, I can agree with this wholeheartedly. I believe that the entrance exam acts as a stopgap against spammers, trolls, and other ne'er-do-wells. It also gives us an opportunity to "vet" a potential new member from the get-go.

That's just my 2 cents. I'm expecting change, as I have enclosed a nickel.

[JCarrill0]

I should reiterate that all this change is; is that we're not requiring people to have passed an exam before they can join our fleets or volunteer.

If divisional leaders still want to utilise exam graduation as a filtering method for recruitment of CL4 or even CL5 candidates, that is their option.

FEO has, for quite some time now, not bothered checking Academy course graduation on completion of PCR requests. Nor is it a factor we consider when we're discussing if someone is suitable for a CL5 position. We trust that our command teams are capable of determining if someone is suitable to work with them or not, and have done all necessary checks/discussions/decisions prior to our involvement.

Having someone who is amazingly enthusiastic, good work ethic and willing to put in the effort to bring about great events/great changes - but being rejected because they didn't pass an exam, sets a very low tone. Likewise, having to pass an exam where the answers are actually in your welcome PM before you can join one of our in-game fleet/guilds is likewise very daft, and as has been said already - detracting.

I think the changes made are positive ones, and the exams are still there. Just whether you want to take them or not

Best post Along with Three and Jon F-G, you guys determined our CL5 & CL6.

[Noram]

Okay, my bad. Sorry!

[Alandrel]

This is a good change. We still retain the exam needed to ensure that new members have read and understood our rules and how we work but removed unnecessary bureaucracy for potential volunteers.

Sounds like a plan, then. My organization uses a simple questionnaire when we're taking applications for staffing, but there's really nothing in there that can't be worked into a conversation on Skype or TeamSpeak.

Less bureaucracy means happier people in general.

[Taku]

So, what you're telling me is that if I had waited three weeks to join…

But honestly, I didn't mind taking the tests (I do mind that I missed one question on the CL4 ), and I think it's not a horrible idea to have a requirement that the people performing a job demonstrate at least a rudimentary knowledge of the subject matter. At least with the testing requirement, if a dispute over procedures arises, a reference point is available. "You passed the CL5, and now you claim that you don't understand why posting that article is a violation of the rules?"

For the Average Joe User it should be optional. For someone that just wants to join the fleet, it should be optional. For someone who wants to be trusted with supervisory authority, I think it should remain a requirement. I say that as someone who will eventually (hopefully) be trusted with some of that authority.

-= Carry on =-