Sorry, but thats just a lie. You are not here to "discuss things", you are here to pressurize FD into doing what you want.
You really think FD have not carefully considered multi faction membership ?
It does not fit within their design in a cost effective manner, so has been ruled out. Can you not accept that ?
I wanted a totally different (and better) design for Squads, but fully appreciate that my solution would have cost ten times the system that FD have implemented. What they have demonstrated (yet to test) is a simple and robust system. Not every group will, or is expected to, utilize all the functionality of Squads. Many will use some of it and be content, many will use some of it and find it detrimental to their current group structure, many will already be wise to it, and probably not use Squads at all. Its just a tool to use as the groups see fit.
Maybe we will get another phase of development of Squads, but not immediately, so I see no point in creating a doom squad based on your perceived weaknesses.
I know this wasn't directed at me, but I'm just going to explain a bit about my take on the squadron aspects.
One of the big things that 3.3 is tackling is the disparity between what you can do purely in-game versus what you can do out-of-game. (I'm not claiming this is FD's primary intention, but it is certainly happening in a substantial way.)
Looking at Squadrons through that lens, we have a current situation of all communications to more than a wing or an instance having to be done out-of-game, and limitations with wings and instances in-game as it is, due to their temporary nature. As well as basic comms, this is a pretty severe restriction on in-game collaboration and info sharing.
Squadrons is a step forwards in tackling that issue.
However, restricting membership to one squadron is a pretty severe limitation in terms of tackling the issue, as it means that things are going to have to be still conducted out-of-game to get around the restriction.
Also, I'm aware that there's limitations to how many people can be in a squadron, and that also potentially means that for larger groups things might potentially still have to be conducted out-of-game. However, multiple squadron membership also provides a solution to that issue, as a large group could be split into a network of squadrons (hierarchical / non-hierarchical as the group sees fit).
So it's effectively a double whammy in terms of the impact of not having membership of multiple squadrons.
This also becomes more of an issue in the future, if there's ever any drive to turn basic comms (i.e. chat) into a more of an information sharing tool, which ties into discoveries, the codex, missions, scenarios, events, and so on and so forth.
Now I know that this is just one part of squadrons, but I think it's worth discussing to highlight the need for that kind of functionality. If this side of things is being restricted due to other aspects of squadrons - the links into Factions, etc. for example - then possibly a modified solution would work.
Allowing membership of only one Powerplay aligned squadron, but membership of others is one suggestion.
Another might be to to have full and lite versions of squadrons, with the former having the full set of functionality and there being a limit to membership of one of these, and the latter having just the comms functionality, and there being membership of multiple of these possible.
It's entirely possible that FD have considered all of this, been through it all, and what they've ended up with is the only pragmatic solution. It's also possible that there's aspects they haven't considered, potential solutions they haven't identified, or that they've identified various possible options and they're going with the one which they think is the priority for the playerbase, in which case it makes sense to try to inform those priorities. I'd imagine that with so much going on out-of-game this represents an issue for FD in decisions around this, as the metrics for various things just aren't going to be there - for example how would it be possible to tell from in-game info to what extent people span multiple groups. We simply don't really know what the actual situation is.
Which for me makes it worth at least discussing it.
