View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently 23 Sep 2018 19:13

Forum rules


- Use common sense and be respectful towards each other at all times, even when disagreeing.
- Do not reveal sensitive game information. Guild secrets, player seconds are examples of things not allowed.



Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Term Limits on Guild Leaders 
Author Message
Adventurer
User avatar

Joined: 13 Jul 2015 10:25
Posts: 94
Location: Sopot, PL
Amberlee wrote:
Because some corruption actually HURT the game people play?
It's good if people have a way of intervening, like regular votes or even assassination to get rid of said asshats that hurt the guilds and the game.(Cheers to you Einar!)
Now look at guilds like Neidar.
No term limits, no idle timer.. No nothing.
Once you're leader, you're leader until someone else is appointed.


I agree with G. - little corruption makes the game more "real". This should not be a fairy tail with elves, unicorns etc.
But on other hand - there are places where corrution gets soo well that one players rules a domain ....

Guess there is no perfect system and only dedicated and working wizards (like our beloved and worshipped Arman) can
"take a look" over mortal lands and adjust mechanics to prevent some things (like max all titles within 48h from guild start ;) )


21 Feb 2018 12:04
Profile WWW
Great Adventurer

Joined: 30 Aug 2017 19:55
Posts: 150
Poultry wrote:
So my question is, how does a lack of terms or democracy benefit the Elemental Worshipers (lay guild) who were just taken over by the OCC branch. I doubt many of the layman wanted to get taken over, and yet they have no recourse. Shut up or lose your guild. Pretty shitty. Players want to have a certain amount of control over their destiny.

This is just one example, but I think it's apt. I don't know all the ins and outs, but I do know that many of the lay members I've talked to feel they had no say in how things played out. That's a bad situation for the entire donut, because players who feel that way are less motivated to play.

There should be some way to include everyone in the decision making processes without total anarchy ensuing.


This one confuses me, because generally the same people who were in power prior to the EC are still in power now. There has never been any secret agenda with what was happening with the EW/EC either, this has been an ongoing process where what was going to be happening is all over the EW Recode Discussion Board since Petros was working on them. It's been what, a decade in the making now?

Even Prior to EC, EW has never been a democracy so I dunno who is surprised about the changes or why.


Far as the suggestion for term limits go I'm half and half with Gorboth on this. I don't think anyone should be forced out of a position due to hardcode, there are some people who just should not be a guild leader and such a process would just invite the chance for those people to take over. However, every guild -should- have some way, shape or form to remove a leader that isn't impossible to do. Like Amberlee pointed out, the Neidars. The only way a vote can be called is by 2/3 Elders doing so. However, if the Thane never promotes anyone to Elder except for RL friends then he essentially holds a monopoly on the guild regardless of the guild members feelings, which should not be allowed.

I remember for the longest time Knights had no way of removing the GM. Eagledraco held on to that spot and was never around at all, which hurt the guild in a huge way back then spiraling it into a dead guild. Then a voting process was added and it has been used for the benefit of the guild a few times now. If the majority of members wish for a change then a way to change should be in every single guild. Be it voting or assassination, but things such as "Those who don't log in for two weeks are removed" or "Only the Council can call a Vote" or even those guilds who just flat out give absolute power to the GM to hold on for as long as they wish to should be fixed. One person hanging on to power for the sake of just having the title can ruin a guild and hurt the game overall.

This game should not be for a select few to live out their glory days, if someone isn't that active and only logs on once or twice a week and just checks mail at that... then they need to pass the torch to someone else. If someone is leading the guild in a manner that the "Members" (Not outside Spectators) dislike, they should have a viable option to remove said person.


21 Feb 2018 12:14
Profile
Adventurer

Joined: 23 Nov 2017 03:45
Posts: 95
Just to clarify:

Dunedain guild after two weeks you are NOT removed.

You only become "vulnerable", as in, the game let others try to take your post.

For example suppose we had a guild called "Knights of the Awesome Order" with rules similar to past knights of solmnia.

So, grandmaster is being active? Then only council can call a vote.

But grandmaster disappears? Then normal members can overrule the council and call a vote themselves...

But if the normal members are hapyp with current grandamster even if he is absent? Tehn they can choose to just not call a vote, and let him stay.


21 Feb 2018 19:19
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 03 Mar 2010 20:51
Posts: 2203
Location: Some old coffin
I'm all in favor of guilds creating systems to oust a stale/toxic leader. However, I am also all in favor of this not being thematically appropriate in all guilds. If certain guilds want to allow an absolute rule without recourse by whomever gains power, that is how it should be. Those guilds and their members may suffer for it, but such is life.

G.

_________________
Mmmmmm ... pie ...


21 Feb 2018 22:07
Profile
Adventurer

Joined: 12 Nov 2017 19:56
Posts: 90
morgzaash wrote:
This should not be a fairy tail with elves, unicorns etc.


!? You dislike elves, apparently. Sod off, then.
You do realize the game has elves, and unicorns, not to mention dragons and knights?
Your point escapes me.


22 Feb 2018 00:26
Profile
Great Adventurer

Joined: 20 May 2017 15:25
Posts: 163
gorboth wrote:
I'm all in favor of guilds creating systems to oust a stale/toxic leader. However, I am also all in favor of this not being thematically appropriate in all guilds. If certain guilds want to allow an absolute rule without recourse by whomever gains power, that is how it should be. Those guilds and their members may suffer for it, but such is life.

G.


Some guilds are *born* with this curse.

Remember Hawk.


22 Feb 2018 01:09
Profile
Beginner

Joined: 10 Feb 2018 21:33
Posts: 14
gorboth wrote:
I'm all in favor of guilds creating systems to oust a stale/toxic leader. However, I am also all in favor of this not being thematically appropriate in all guilds. If certain guilds want to allow an absolute rule without recourse by whomever gains power, that is how it should be. Those guilds and their members may suffer for it, but such is life.

G.


OK, so how does a guild "want" to allow absolute rule? You mean because it was coded that way? What if the people using the guild don't want it that way?

What if once upon a time someone did want it that way, but a new generation of guild members no longer do?

Every guild needs to have a way to remove people from power. The people in the guild should be able to do it. And the people who are using the guild (IE active players) should be the ones to decided.

I love how the RDA retires their stubborn generals. That could be one option.


22 Feb 2018 01:25
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 03 Mar 2010 20:51
Posts: 2203
Location: Some old coffin
There are many options, and they are all in the hands of the creators. Some creators wanted their guilds to have democracy. Some wanted their guilds to have no such options. I agree with you that if, many years later, a guild needs to change to include such options after a long-absent creator's vision no longer makes any sense, that such things should be considered.

In the case of numerous guilds these days, the creators are still around, or wizards who knew the creator well and still agree with his or her vision are still around. This results in some guilds not getting that function, because it is known the creator did not want that. In other cases, we have added such things.

It will not be a universal thing - guild-by-guild is the way we do it, case-by-case in accordance with the thematic values and how things are currently deemed best by those who manage the guild from a wizard standpoint. Listening to player concerns is part of our job. Maintaining the design of the game that we believe is the best overall is the other side. Hopefully, we are able to do both "well enough." But there will always be people unhappy with this or that decision or design.

G.

_________________
Mmmmmm ... pie ...


22 Feb 2018 01:31
Profile
Great Adventurer

Joined: 04 Jun 2010 23:37
Posts: 151
Quote:
Now look at guilds like Neidar.
No term limits, no idle timer.. No nothing.


Wrong.

Quote:
Like Amberlee pointed out, the Neidars. The only way a vote can be called is by 2/3 Elders doing so. However, if the Thane never promotes anyone to Elder except for RL friends then he essentially holds a monopoly on the guild regardless of the guild members feelings, which should not be allowed.


Wrong again.

Please get your facts straight before making false statements, mkay? ;)


23 Feb 2018 10:16
Profile
Great Adventurer

Joined: 30 Aug 2017 19:55
Posts: 150
Rincon wrote:
Quote:
Now look at guilds like Neidar.
No term limits, no idle timer.. No nothing.


Wrong.

Quote:
Like Amberlee pointed out, the Neidars. The only way a vote can be called is by 2/3 Elders doing so. However, if the Thane never promotes anyone to Elder except for RL friends then he essentially holds a monopoly on the guild regardless of the guild members feelings, which should not be allowed.


Wrong again.

Please get your facts straight before making false statements, mkay? ;)


That actually came from a few Neidars themselves, I was merely repeating. Feel free to correct it though. How do the Neidar replace the Thane they don't want?


23 Feb 2018 16:37
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.