Talk:Angels
Kjel is not a founder of Angels
I've removed the list of founders under the following reasoning: The foundation of an alliance is not just the first HC to get the ball rolling. The foundation of an alliance (imo) is the combination of members and command staff that comprise the beginning of an alliance. It is, in my view, quite obvious that Kjeldoran is a founder of Angels, even if he did not take, or even take part in, the initial actions to get the ball rolling. Perhaps a better word than founder would be architect. It's pretty clear from the conversations I've had that alch (along with a few others) were the original architects behind the FAnG follow-up that became Angels. But I don't think it's fair to claim that only these first command members were the foundation of a battle group or alliance. This would be comparable (in my mind) to c7R (and their round 1 friends) being the founders of Fury. With the 17th Legion being the founders of Legion (though I'm a bit less clear on the history there). Similarly censor et al couldn't have founded nos without the members who went on to play in round 4.
Most people choose to define founders in terms of when they joined an alliance. Not necessarily including oneself, but definitely putting the cutoff after that point. I don't think this is fair or correct. And I've edited the article to reflect this. If various e-penises in Angels want to change the article to reflect theirs or others's contributions, they can do so by listing ranks and responsibilities handled, rather than mumbo jumbo credits for having joined earlier than anyone else. -Banned 23:42, 3 Sep 2005 (BST)
I think you made the right decision, angels became what it becames because of the core and the people leading it rather than few individual, that was the spirit of angels when we decided to go on with only the core, i think we should stick to this spirit even on PAwiki and stop with theses e-penis fight. -alch
