Useful

**Bad CO** · 17-01-2012, 12:09

Its been suggested to me that there is a perception that this forum is only for officers and that "lesser mortals" may not feel happy contributing to the discussion. Personally I don't feel that this is, or should be, the case but accept that the title of the forum may be misleading.

I've therefore put up the poll to let people think whether we should change the name of this forum to make it clear that it isn't just about Officers (Defence Discussion?), add in another separate forum for all ranks discussion or not change anything.

Let me know what you think?

**Auld-Yin** · 17-01-2012, 16:04

I think with a title "Staff College & Staff Officers" it does kind of lend itself to those and them.

Now while I agree that some officers do have their uses

for an all round discussion bringing in the experience of many of the older ARRSERs who have not succumbed to a commission (yet) a new Defence Matters forum could be started. You never know, it might even encourage the older commissioned officers who did not get to Staff College are were only 'sq'.!!

There are a lot of experienced WOs & Staffys who could and should contribute to the discussion.

An excellent subject for starting off a new Forum would be to take forward the discussion started in Book Reviews on Behavioural Conflict. A lot of good stuff there and I am sure that many who do not frequent the Library would be more open to discussion in a straight forum - one whose title does not exclude a large part of the Army (and other Services).

**alfred_the_great** · 17-01-2012, 16:15

My only concern that is if this becomes either a) an extension of the NAAFI (the usual suspects are not welcome here frankly) or b) an extension of the harrier/CVS/abolish the RAF bore-off that surfaces quite frequently in CA.

A-Y has a point about behavioural conflict being moved here, if only for a little more discussion.

How about Developments, Concepts and Doctrine?

**Auld-Yin** · 17-01-2012, 16:20

Originally Posted by alfred_the_great

My only concern that is if this becomes either a) an extension of the NAAFI (the usual suspects are not welcome here frankly) or b) an extension of the harrier/CVS/abolish the RAF bore-off that surfaces quite frequently in CA.

A-Y has a point about behavioural conflict being moved here, if only for a little more discussion.

How about Developments, Concepts and Doctrine?

Is that
a: No- don't change
b: Yes - change to D,C,D,
c: New Forum for D,C,D?

I am not clear where you stand.

**Charm_City** · 17-01-2012, 16:27

If someone is so thick as to believe any public part of the Internet is ringfenced by rank, current or former, it is unlikely you are missing any great contribution to defence thinking. And it seems pretty moribund anyway.

C_C

Late Corporal, Her Majesty's Corps of Intelligencers, and quite at ease talking (slowly and clearly, with pauses) to staff officers.

**Cabana** · 17-01-2012, 16:28

IMHO nothing should change. People should realise that this is an internet forum and as such rank is not an issue here. As a none officer type chap I am more then happy to contribute (well, write something) on this forum should the need arise, and if some officer type thinks that I shouldn't then they will soon understand otherwise.

**alfred_the_great** · 17-01-2012, 16:31

Originally Posted by Auld-Yin

Is that
a: No- don't change
b: Yes - change to D,C,D,
c: New Forum for D,C,D?

I am not clear where you stand.

Then I am a perfect Staff Officer :D

**bokkatankie** · 17-01-2012, 16:32

Originally Posted by alfred_the_great

My only concern that is if this becomes either a) an extension of the NAAFI (the usual suspects are not welcome here frankly) or b) an extension of the harrier/CVS/abolish the RAF bore-off that surfaces quite frequently in CA.

A-Y has a point about behavioural conflict being moved here, if only for a little more discussion.

How about Developments, Concepts and Doctrine?

We have Developments, Concepts and Doctrine?