So I recently saw an HM ATT a trainer to give up his seat (which was a seat away from an arrow) for an agent. Is this allowed?
He ATT'ed a trainer and told him to give his seat up for an agent who needed a reward. I thought you couldn't ATT for a seat.
as the trainer afk ?
The trainer wasn't afk
No it isn't.
The rules clearly state ATT'ing for a seat is NOT allowed under any circumstances.
Let's have a different scenario, in this one BrewFury did not ATT the trainer and instead asked if the seat could be given up for an agent who was unable to work any other station in base. This wouldn't be against the rules now would it? Just because he used the word ATT to call for the trainer's attention doesn't really mean it's wrong, he did it out of good intention for the new agent and it wasn't as if there was anything written here to say that the trainer strongly opposed to that. If BrewFury were to ATT the trainer out of his seat so that he could have it, then I would consider it against the rules. See, there's a difference and this is something I'd like to see debated over.
When you put it like that then I suppose it changes everything. But still the rules apply, meaning ATT'ing in any occasion to take someone's seat away is forbidden. I do agree that this is a good issue to discuss, but the Ownership Team would be the one to make the final descision should they choose to debate it.
although I see credit to both views present within the last two comments surely the recruit could of been asked to wait behind an arrow and then take the seat once it was free and stay there the 35mins to get a reward. In my opinion it is unfair and unjust to request anyone move seats. The trainer sat in that seat might have been sat there for well over 20mins and was unable to find a seat when he came into work. All working members require points and therefore all members have a right to their seats, although it doesn't show that brew fury was in anyway unhappy about this the fact remains a trainer will be worried that a hm+ would get him into trouble if he didn't obay. If the hm+ member made it very clear that it was a friendly request and not an order then that in my opinion would be better. I can see why the rule of ATT is is used to avoid such confusion so I agree with the last comment it should be set in stone!
You make a very compelling argument. Well said.
The ATT rule is solid as just. It's understandable that said Agent is new to the UN and it would be great if the Trainer could give his seat to the Agent, but in view, it would be up to the Trainer if he wishes to give his seat. I've seen Owners request MUTIPLE members at one time to give up their seats to new Agents, they don't pick and choose who to ATT and ask if they can give up their seat. So pretty much, BrewFury had the right intentions, but still shouldn't call ATT to ask/require someone to give up their seat. It'd be better for him to ask the whole FTF if anyone was willing to give their seat to the new Agent or the Agent could wait for a seat to be vacant for him to take. I can't make an observative point on the new Agent, but the good side to him waiting for a seat is that he can observe and get an idea on how he should properly let people in, since there's still Agents who let people in with wrong badges, mottos or even both which is putting extra work onto Security ( though they have the option to kick ;P )
I think this is an easy solution who is the trainer? Then we tell her to read the trainer guide.there it says the rules then the hm will know.Right or wrong guys!
I think you've read it wrong, this debate is about being able to ATT for a seat. Rules state ATT cannot be used for a seat, but the HM ATTed a trainer to give up his seat for an agent - which is not specified in the rules if it is allowed.
But doesnt that technically mean arrow hunting because it say no arrow hunting
Arrow hunting is when someone who has just claimed a reward takes a seat less than 15 minutes away from them, or takes a seat with an arrow that is under 2 minutes. Here, someone ATT'ed someone to give up their seat.
it doesnt matter who it is for, it clearly states that you cannot ATT someone to et out of their seat for you or sombody elses own purpose. that is abusing the power, ATT is only to get someones attention when they are missbehaving or sleeping. HM should know this
I think That ATT'ing for a seat is not allowed.But to get a Correct and reliable answer i think we should ask the owners because we will not solve anything
I'm surprised. After 2 months of this debate, and it's still active. Just to recap on what I have said before, the trainer is not at will to give up his seat because an HM said/asked him to, he can decline to give the agent the seat if he wanted to. As a member, you don't single out someone and call them to ATT and ask for the seat for whoever, you just walk up to the workstations and ask everyone "Is anyone willing to give up their seat for this agent?" If someone is willing, they will, if not, then he can wait for a seat to be open.
So true..so true *Claps*