New topic questions

SFC James Baber — Mon, 16 Dec 2013 22:54:15 -0500

<p>While we have had a variety of topic questions posted over the last few months some have been repetitive and some just completely ignored.</p><p><br></p><p>Give us a example of what you feel would be a good and interesting topic for a intense topic post.</p><p><br></p><p>I think we need some new blood in the topics and maybe some of the members are not comfortable in posting a topic, put your suggestions here and maybe someone else will take the lead if it seems to be a topic of interest. </p><p><br></p><p>Let me know if you think this would make a good way to put some fresh ideas out there.</p>

Response by SGT Dillon Townsel made Dec 16 at 2013 11:24 PM

SGT Dillon Townsel — Mon, 16 Dec 2013 23:24:09 -0500

I'm fairly new here, so forgive me if this is a topic that has been discussed before. <div><br></div><div>Since we have a great mix of servicemembers and veterans on RallyPoint, can we get a discussion started about why people did or did not choose to re-enlist/go indef? It would be interesting to hear from both perspectives and the thread could also provide a lot of insight for people approaching the same fork in the road.</div>

Response by MAJ Bryan Zeski made Dec 17 at 2013 10:11 AM

MAJ Bryan Zeski — Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:11:34 -0500

I don't think there is really a problem with repetitive questions due to how unwieldy the format becomes when the topics get large. I stop reading topics I'm genuinely interested in because I can't find where someone responded or posted something new with any kind of ease.

Response by CPT Aaron Kletzing made Dec 17 at 2013 12:53 PM

CPT Aaron Kletzing — Tue, 17 Dec 2013 12:53:33 -0500

Hi everyone, thanks for your feedback on this.  Here at RallyPoint, we have already identified this as an issue we will be working to improve on.  We did not build this upfront, because we didn't know whether/how much our members would engage with the feature.  Now, it's clear that people are engaging a lot, so we'll be improving on it.  Ah, the joys of an agile development system. ;-)

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 22 at 2014 2:59 AM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Oct 2014 02:59:15 -0400

Here's a topic for you, should soldiers with p3 profiles be aloud to elect to do events that he/she is on permenant profile for, with guidance from a doctor, if not what is the regulation that says that they can or can not. I am on permanent profile for my back, so no bending, twisting, running, etc. However, my doctor has told me numerous times that if i can do something then to do it, but when it starts to hurt then stop. I got to my new unit and after the waiting period i took an APFT. I was counseled stating that no one in the company was making me do the events and that i was doing them of my own free will, which I understood and accepted, and then took the events. My APFT was about to expire and i would lose my promotable status if i didn't take one soon, and I don't like to do things half way and i can still do the events as long as its not an everyday thing to push myself to muscle failure, as many of us do on an apft. When s1 got a copy of my new APFT they took my points that i had earned for the events that i was exempted from and gave me the minimum, which in turn dropped my points considerably, and as such missed getting promoted for the last 2 months. I feel that i earned those points and that i should be able to get them back. I have PCSD 6 times in 6 years and have been in 7 different units, I am no "shit bag" thats just the way it has worked out with base closures and reclassification due to my profile. In all the other units that i have been in I have been aloud to do the events no problem. With all of the research that I have done in the last 6 months I haven't found any where where it states definitively yes or no. So if anyone knows the answer to this really long post please let me know.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 31 at 2018 2:19 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 31 Jan 2018 14:19:46 -0500

How about comments on the Rules of Engagement from 1988 to the present. It could have been done so much better had political considerations (and politicians) not been able to influence things about which they knew nothing