AJ1990

Thank you Bob. I have read over the discussion on the legion council now it’s been moved to public view

It’s clear to see even here in this thread just who is working against the ioc, and against their own works.

Thank you for your efforts on the matter. Now that a light is being shone behind those closed doors it’s no surprise as to who is working against us on this, and no surprise they wanted it hidden in closed council.

This is the reason I’m so offended by the lmo’s on this. They literally have no reason beyond “because we said so!” But saying “no this is fine” for others.

Policy should not be justified behind closed doors.  It should be out in the open.  And I will do what I can to have these policies and decisions discussed put in the open.  Please bear with us. 

This is the reason I’m so offended by the lmo’s on this. They literally have no reason beyond “because we said so!” But saying “no this is fine” for others.

Yes, it’s inconsistency like this that have so many of us so upset.
If there were clear and defined rules and procedures that would be one thing, and I’m sure we would all accept that.
(For those who argue that there MUST be 360° views, this is quite simply not the case. The very wording says that ideally there should be these views available, is does not say that they are a definitive requirement)
But this doesn’t appear to be the case here. We see some costumes get through and others not.
I’ve said it here before and I’ve said in the moan Legion boards, CRLs are continuously revised and updated over time. I’m literally part of the IOC CRL team doing that very thing now. We are talking about a fabric tunic which in all likelihood has nothing to see on that back than we’ve already seen. The very reason it hasn’t been seen is that there’s nothing to see. There is no hard armour, no backpack, no wings or fairylights there. It’s fabric. There might be an additional seam. And this is worst case. 
If the CRL was green lit right now with the known sources, any future references could be easily incorporated into the text or images, if required.
This happens literally all the time. We improve our CRLs when more information comes to light. 

As a long time member I remember when the Omega RC joined the Legion, there was not a single visual reference, it was pretty much just like "Deltas but all black" and they got in. (at this moment we still don't have references of their backpacks)
There are many costumes (mostly FSE and Spec Ops) that have been approved over the years and this one has, IMO (GML for 10+ years) all that is needed. (by far)
 

I hope you know that "the 501st" DOES want you and your costume.  It's just a few who are in an unfortunate position to block approval who are against this, and only because of the lack of reference.  (How consistently that is applied is obviously another story). But I strongly suspect a majority in the 501st DEFINITELY want you to be approved.  Myself included, of course.

I get that, but I’m getting so very sick and tired of “high levels of legion = behind closed doors” - this should be brought to the public eye as to how biased, unfair and dangerously arrogant the lmo’s have been abusing their position.

https://imperialgunners.com/forums/index.php?/topic/3357-sith-fleet-technician-tros-crl-draft/

https://imperialgunners.com/forums/index.php?/topic/3200-sith-fleet-technician-research-and-discussion/

https://imperialgunners.com/forums/index.php?/topic/3357-sith-fleet-technician-tros-crl-draft/

I’ve trawled through that research thread on the IGC forums. Believe me, there’s less.

I’m less worried about the costume being forgotten than I am about the atrocities that go under the rug. I have full faith this costume will be approved, but the damage being done in the meantime….someone has to own this series of mistakes.

Oh he has don’t worry. This costume has not been forgotten! 

Well I’ve raised this issue on the main legion forums, and although Steph as a non-member cannot, I would challenge anyone else in here who has the backbone to join me in asking the lmo’s to explain themselves on this.

Bascially for want of a nail (or more specifically the lower 30 cm of the back of the tunic. I have no idea where this blanket 'missing the back' thing has come from that everyone keeps talking about. We have shots of the top part of the back from movie stills. We can see the seam across the shoulders) this is dead in the water. 

I think the plan is to re-submit the CRL for approval after the change of Legion Command early next year.

Hi there, I only just stumbled across this thread today and have to say that I am quite shocked by some of the disrespectful comments aimed at the Spec Ops detachment. As a long serving staff member of Spec Ops (currently DL) we do not tolerate this kind of behaviour from anyone on our forums. We take great pride working on our CRL's and adhere to the CRL development guidelines 110%. If you have issue with any of our CRLs you should bring that up with us on our forums as we are happy to take feedback.
 
Thanks
 

Sorry to say that, but if you read the complete creation of this CRL, you shouldn't have used the wording "half baked" in this context. It's a well researched costume based on all accessible references. The only thing not covered by references is the lower back. I personally raised this concern, but I'm fine with the approach Steph used. Should it be a showstopper then? Neither the written process demands references for all details nor did the handling of other CRLs by the LMOs indicate that. 

We/someone could reach out to Stella Atkinson (the assistant costume designer and name giver for the rankband) to get more information as Glynn Dilon suggested she could know more as I asked him via Twitter about the rankband last year (he deleted his replies). But I can't find any contact of her. 

The fact still stands that the ‘rules’ aren’t applied consistently. There are enough examples of CRLs going through even recently that support this. 
We do have references for the back. 
Are they the best? No, but we have them. 
Can we hand on heart extrapolate the details? Based on the fact that some CRLs have come from comics and toys (not to mention that this is a fabric costume not entirely dissimilar to others we know so well) I also fully believe we can. 
 
I’ve said this before but I’ll say it again. 
At WORST, based on the evidence we have, there’s a missing seam or two. 
Not a thermal detonator, not a green armour butt-plate with a tail that shoots lasers. 
At BEST, the proposal is exactly right.
 
If, in the YEARS to come, we find out there is a missing seam we can update the CRL. This kind of thing happens all the time.
 
CRLs have been made using less reliable evidence that this.

Can’t agree more. Being in the same garrison as the one who has been working on this costume, I was super excited for it and would have followed as soon as the crl was greenlit.

Now?

Well I guess I’m staying with my bridge crew as my ONLY IOC costume.

Disappointed in the lmo’s for this. Disappointed in the sheer ridiculous nature of the call.

People are more than within their rights to hold me accountable for my jab, I’ll take that on board.

But

We are still left here with very few answers to a mountain of questions, so how about rather than jabbing/defending, we actually get the answers we deserve?

The stated rules are deliberately there for interpretation and judgement call. So why have the lmo’s seen fit to green light the likes of the solo navy trooper and the galaxy’s edge figure of the mountain trooper, but NOT this one?

Why has this one been targeted for the nix list?

Thank you, very well said.  I think this is the crux of what is upsetting many of us here.  It isn’t  that a decision has been made that we don’t like, it is that the reason given is something that is frequently unevenly applied.

as @Hoda cited above, the reason for denying this costume is not a matter of policy, it is a judgement call. They are perfectly able to approve this by the rules provided there.
 
This is not a matter of accuracy. Accuracy is hitting your target, doing something to a standard.  This is about setting the standard when there is only so much information.  This is about assuming what would be on the lower back of this costume (we have references for the upper back).  So what would be on the bottom back of a uniform like this?  What can we infer?  A princess seam? A single seam? A part in the back like a suit jacket? Given that the suit is black on black even if we had a clear photo, we may not see it.  So we do what we do with every costume that we have no laid hands on: we guess.
 
This is nothing new, it has happened with most of our costumes and many popular ones.  We guess on colors, pockets no pockets, the nature of seams.  I have heard LMOs argue that their perception should take precedent over what things actually are.  Even when we get all of the details right, there are many questions on how it should look on different sized people, tall, short, thin, heavy, men, women.  That is why we have been engaging with tailors that make these things.  This way they can give an informed professional opinion on why something may be a certain way, not the opinion of someone who doesn't know what they are looking at.  If you are not making these costumes with your own hands, if you can't do that, your ability is limited.  That is not a failing, but an acknowledgement that not everyone can be all things.   

The 451 costume will be adjusted in the weeks to come.  As a consequence of this the Army Operations CRL may be delayed until those changes go through, because it is the exact same costume with a different colored tunic.  We get requests for adjustments to different costumes all the time.  And we look at the evidence.  Rarely is anything left to our interpretation.  If it is clear cut it is not our call to make, it is our duty to implement it.  The personalities of who are in offices should not govern this, evidence and precedence should govern how things are made and released.  The evidence is here in these earlier pages of the thread.  The precedence is here with other costumes with less info being released by this LMO office this year.
 
Development is a never ending process.  When we award someone a level 2 or 3 award, it is not saying they are perfect, it is saying they meet the highest requirements we have at this time.  That may irritate some people to hear that, but that is how it is.  We don't yank certifications if new details come out.  We even grandfather what they have cleared.  What changes are the details of the CRL.  And in many cases the changes are so minor that they would only affect level 2 or 3 anyway.

And that is what would likely be here with the Sith Eternal Officer.  Any new information would likely only affect a level 2 or 3.  This has happened many times before with many other costumes.  This is the history of the legion and how it has always been.  There are dozens of examples to illustrate this.

As for our head LMOs, I am sure they can answer for their offices.  They do not need others answering for them, especially when it is not members of their staff or that department defending their decision.  Even if their "staff" made this decision, it is because the head LMOs  that gave them the power to do so.  And therefore, the head LMOs that answer for it.  At the end of the day it is their policy and their responsibility.  There are questions that we would appreciate them answering.
 
 

Pathfinders - Mountain Trooper.

Where was the sources for that? That was solely from a galaxy’s edge exclusive action figure....

This is the problem I have seen pointed out several times in the last few hours in this thread. There are way too many examples of “yes, THESE are the rules, but not when it applies to X,Y or Z, because WE deem it so”.