Curse

Series · Jul 10, 2007, 10:57 PM // 22:57

2 solutions:

A) Only promote people you KNOW are trustworthy to officer.
B) Promote every single person to officer. Bam, not a single person can be kicked by anyone but the leader.

Not that difficult.

nbajammer · Jul 11, 2007, 12:10 AM // 00:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by assassin_of_ni

typically if a person is trying to sabotage a guild theyre not gonna wait 2-3 months to do it nor are they gonna go so far as to meet my criteria of an early promotion....theyll more than likely just leave.

If they're out to do it, they will wait however long it takes. They won't care how long they have to wait, because if they are going to do it they know their time is coming.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Series

2 solutions:

A) Only promote people you KNOW are trustworthy to officer.
B) Promote every single person to officer. Bam, not a single person can be kicked by anyone but the leader.

Not that difficult.

A) Apparences can be deceiving
B) That defeats the purpose of even having officers.

arcanemacabre · Jul 11, 2007, 12:13 AM // 00:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by nbajammer

B) That defeats the purpose of even having officers.

And that purpose is? Honestly, I've never understood the point.

lacasner · Jul 11, 2007, 12:17 AM // 00:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

And that purpose is? Honestly, I've never understood the point.

Guild leaders have a life too, try running a guild with no officers its not easy.

arcanemacabre · Jul 11, 2007, 12:27 AM // 00:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by lacasner

Guild leaders have a life too, try running a guild with no officers its not easy.

It's called the rest of the guild. Why would you invite anyone into a guild that couldn't help the guild. That's what I don't get. Just make everyone an officer. I don't understand there being a difference.

Maximumraver · Jul 11, 2007, 12:33 AM // 00:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

I'd say that issues like this are player issues that should be handled by players.

Nothing to add.

lennymon · Jul 11, 2007, 01:25 AM // 01:25

So you'd ban yourself and your own guild leader for inviting and/or promoting the officer who kicked everyone right? Since the guild leader is ultimately responsible, and you share that responsibility by being in a guild where that kind of thing could even begin to happen.

If ANYof your guild leaders promotes someone who does this:
1. Immature brat gets a guild invite.
Brat: "make me an officer NOW!!!!!"
Brat: "make me an officer NOW!!!!!"
Brat: "make me an officer NOW!!!!!"
Brat: "make me an officer NOW!!!!!"
Brat: "make me an officer NOW!!!!!"
Leader wisely promotes him.
Brat kicks all members and laughs.

You should (in order) 1: Find a new (as in different) guild. 2: inform your now ex-guild leader that they're an idiot not only for inviting brat, but after demand #1 they should've been kicked out. 3: Kick yourself for joining a guild where that could happen. and 4: Make sure the new guild's leader understands that you feel somewhat strongly about their use of wisdom in choosing officers, and that you really don't mind looking for a new guild now if it might be a problem. 5: Perhaps even suggest a code of conduct or a guild bill of rights....
When you get right down to it, if YOU choose to join a guild which will promote 'brat' then YOU are almost as guilty as 'brat' for allowing the whole unfortunate series of events to happen. You've supported it by being in a guild without decent leadership or a code for choosing its officers. These codes are important, ask for them by name!

nbajammer · Jul 11, 2007, 05:43 AM // 05:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

It's called the rest of the guild. Why would you invite anyone into a guild that couldn't help the guild. That's what I don't get. Just make everyone an officer. I don't understand there being a difference.

Making everyone an officer doesn't do anything for the cause. Observe:

Guild Leader Guild Leader Guild Leader
10 Officers 99 Officers No Officers
89 Members No Members 99 Members

The first one is the sort of guild mine is. The second one is what you propose, and the third is the one without officers. Notice there is absolutely no difference whatsoever between the last 2. Sure if everyone was an officer thered be no kicking problem - but you are still left with a situation where the guild leader can have a life, and no one left to run the guild. But that's what an officer was for, I thought someone said?

Quote:

Originally Posted by lennymon

So you'd ban yourself and your own guild leader for inviting and/or promoting the officer who kicked everyone right? Since the guild leader is ultimately responsible, and you share that responsibility by being in a guild where that kind of thing could even begin to happen.

If ANYof your guild leaders promotes someone who does this:
1. Immature brat gets a guild invite.
Brat: "make me an officer NOW!!!!!"
Brat: "make me an officer NOW!!!!!"
Brat: "make me an officer NOW!!!!!"
Brat: "make me an officer NOW!!!!!"
Brat: "make me an officer NOW!!!!!"
Leader wisely promotes him.
Brat kicks all members and laughs.

You should (in order) 1: Find a new (as in different) guild. 2: inform your now ex-guild leader that they're an idiot not only for inviting brat, but after demand #1 they should've been kicked out. 3: Kick yourself for joining a guild where that could happen. and 4: Make sure the new guild's leader understands that you feel somewhat strongly about their use of wisdom in choosing officers, and that you really don't mind looking for a new guild now if it might be a problem. 5: Perhaps even suggest a code of conduct or a guild bill of rights....
When you get right down to it, if YOU choose to join a guild which will promote 'brat' then YOU are almost as guilty as 'brat' for allowing the whole unfortunate series of events to happen. You've supported it by being in a guild without decent leadership or a code for choosing its officers. These codes are important, ask for them by name!

I'm going to start off by saying that you are presuming that the leader is at fault here - completely false. If the 'brat' is showing something to the leader that isn't there, and the leader has no reason to believe it's a false pretense, then it isn't the fault of the leader. This has been stated time and time again. We are not all mind-readers.

Next the issue is not that of a 'brat' whining til he gets promoted then kicking everyone, but rather a malicious person hiding behind the facade of a trustworthy person to gain the position - completely different than what you are talking about.

Finally that's your opinion, to which you are entitled, however you dont have the right to tell us, the players, what we should or should not do in situations such as these. Please re-read the thread to understand the issue at stake here, as it is clear you don't understand it.

Miral · Jul 11, 2007, 05:49 AM // 05:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by nbajammer

Re-read Rules of Conduct #1. This would fall under more than one condition, and can also be defined as griefing. Depending on the situation, Anet can easily choose to ban the offender. Whether they do or not, however, is up to Anet themselves. Being an ass still violates RoC #1 when it meets the criteria listed.

o.O if being an ass was a bannable offense, 90% of PvP players and 75% of PvE players would be banned o.O

arcanemacabre · Jul 11, 2007, 06:15 AM // 06:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by nbajammer

Making everyone an officer doesn't do anything for the cause. Observe:

Guild Leader Guild Leader Guild Leader
10 Officers 99 Officers No Officers
89 Members No Members 99 Members

The first one is the sort of guild mine is. The second one is what you propose, and the third is the one without officers. Notice there is absolutely no difference whatsoever between the last 2. Sure if everyone was an officer thered be no kicking problem - but you are still left with a situation where the guild leader can have a life, and no one left to run the guild. But that's what an officer was for, I thought someone said?

What is left for the guild leader to do in the second scenario? Kick people? Buy a new guild hall? Anything else? If that's too much for a leader to handle, even with this so-called "life" you speak of, perhaps they shouldn't be leader.

Making everyone an officer makes the guild more democratic. Instead of a board of "leet" officers & leader deciding who should be kicked or added, the whole guild is responsible, and should pass along votes to their leader. It seems to me that the only people who support a handful of officers are ones that respect that position, and the fluff entitled to it, rather then the guild itself.

Of course, this is all my opinion, and how I see things. I don't look down on anyone that chooses to operate their guild however they see fit. In fact, I encourage it and love the fact that there are options. Honestly, it would be nice if there were more options. Perhaps instead of a couple of ranks (saying an officer is "higher ranked" than a member, for instance), there could be specific titles, none more important than the other, for more equality in the guild.

For instance, there could be a rank of guildie that can only recruit/ban members, and a different rank that can only purchase things for the guild and manage a guild bank of sorts. Stuff like that.

nbajammer · Jul 11, 2007, 06:24 AM // 06:24

What is it with people not fully reading the preceding posts?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miral

o.O if being an ass was a bannable offense, 90% of PvP players and 75% of PvE players would be banned o.O

I said "when it meets the criteria". In other words, the provisions listed in the Rules of Conduct.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

What is left for the guild leader to do in the second scenario? Kick people? Buy a new guild hall? Anything else? If that's too much for a leader to handle, even with this so-called "life" you speak of, perhaps they shouldn't be leader.

Making everyone an officer makes the guild more democratic. Instead of a board of "leet" officers & leader deciding who should be kicked or added, the whole guild is responsible, and should pass along votes to their leader. It seems to me that the only people who support a handful of officers are ones that respect that position, and the fluff entitled to it, rather then the guild itself.

Of course, this is all my opinion, and how I see things. I don't look down on anyone that chooses to operate their guild however they see fit. In fact, I encourage it and love the fact that there are options. Honestly, it would be nice if there were more options. Perhaps instead of a couple of ranks (saying an officer is "higher ranked" than a member, for instance), there could be specific titles, none more important than the other, for more equality in the guild.

For instance, there could be a rank of guildie that can only recruit/ban members, and a different rank that can only purchase things for the guild and manage a guild bank of sorts. Stuff like that.

Guild leaders are entitled to have a life as much as anyone else. To suggest that a leader should dedicate themselves fully to the game 100%, and to everything else 0%, is completely foolish. In the second scenario only the leader can kick, sure, but what happens if the guild isn't full? What if the guild has 1 leader and 54 officers, with a total membership of 55? That is the whole point of the excercise. I have been in guilds where everyone was an officer and they flat out did not work.

Guilds are democratic only if the guild leader designs them in that fashion. Not every guild is democratic, nor should they be. They were formed by the leader to serve a purpose set forth by the leader.

That said, none of this means anyone should freely be able to join a guild and disrupt its membership - under any circumstances whatsoever. Your last paragraph seems to coincide with what I believe the OP to be seeking - ways to better control guild ranks such that the risk of abuse is kept to the utmost minimum, if not eliminated. Something needs to change here if this sort of behavior is occurring as often as some posters have suggested.

arcanemacabre · Jul 11, 2007, 06:37 AM // 06:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by nbajammer

That said, none of this means anyone should freely be able to join a guild and disrupt its membership - under any circumstances whatsoever. Your last paragraph seems to coincide with what I believe the OP to be seeking - ways to better control guild ranks such that the risk of abuse is kept to the utmost minimum, if not eliminated. Something needs to change here if this sort of behavior is occurring as often as some posters have suggested.

Agreed. Honestly, for a game called "Guild Wars", you'd think there would be a lot of detail put into "guilds". Instead we get two ranks of members and a leader, a guild hall that serves very little purpose beyond an un-crowded town with limited NPCs and guild battles, oh and capes with very limited design options. Right now, being in a guild simply means you have an extended friends list, yay. I really hope there are more improvements in GWEN, and a completely re-designed approach to guilds in GW2.

Also, I have no problem with the Guild Leader "having a life" at all. I just expect a guild with a substantial amount of members to have a leader that is at least somewhat committed to the game and their guild. This does not mean on 24/7, or even every day for a few hours, but at the very least once a week to check up on things when they're a little burnt out. That's honestly all I'd expect from a leader, everything else earns brownie points.

Onarik Amrak · Jul 11, 2007, 06:52 AM // 06:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miral

o.O if being an ass was a bannable offense, 90% of PvP players and 75% of PvE players would be banned o.O

LoL, if only it was so simple...

Nevar Deathbringer · Jul 11, 2007, 06:57 AM // 06:57

It seems that maybe the officers should only be allowed to ban a member from use of the guild facilities and only the guild leader have the power to "kick" another player from the guild. That way there would have to be some discussion with the leader as well as the officer and the individual to be "kicked" as for the reason for being kicked. Does that make sense? Just a random thought.

Miral · Jul 11, 2007, 07:22 AM // 07:22

"While playing Guild Wars, you must respect the rights of others and their rights to play and enjoy the game. To this end, you may not defraud, harass, threaten, or cause distress and/or unwanted attention to other players."
thats the rule #1 you're talking about, ya?
well then what I said stands... 90% of PvPers and 75% of PvEers violate this at one point or another. hell the way the rules are written just saying hi to someone in local chat could be a violation if they chose to report it.

anywho, the point being, while purging members from a guild is a mean thing to do, it is no more a violation of the rules than what 90% of the players say or do on a daily basis without action taken against them...

VanDamselx · Jul 11, 2007, 07:46 AM // 07:46

I've actually had this happen in a guild where we supposed everything was fine and dandy.

So we all started out in separate guilds and decided to merge together in an old guild some of us were in. About 4-5 of us were designated as officers and we got the guild up and running to about a reasonable size. Unfortunately, there were two officers that decided what our guild was about and it started to become a very unhappy place. Thinking that these guys were our friends, we decided to confront them that we all love playing with them, but sometimes we get bored or just want to do something else (all they cared to do was HA). Well, they took it as an insult and just started kicking everyone in the guild, invited them to their new guild and essentially ruined it. It was too late before we could take any action and trust me, it destroyed game play for a while. It really is a heinous act and A-Net should implement something where all kicks have to be approved by the leader or something because that definitely would have never happened had our guild leader been able to step in. I think it's something that should be punishable. You lose a lot of valuable time over it.

Gli · Jul 11, 2007, 08:37 AM // 08:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miral

anywho, the point being, while purging members from a guild is a mean thing to do, it is no more a violation of the rules than what 90% of the players say or do on a daily basis without action taken against them...

I don't want to get into an argument about it, but that has to be one of the most nonsensical statements I've ever read on these forums.

Miral · Jul 11, 2007, 08:52 AM // 08:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gli

I don't want to get into an argument about it, but that has to be one of the most nonsensical statements I've ever read on these forums.

im not saying it isnt worse as far as damage done or morals or whathaveyou, but how the rules are written, what i said holds true. perhaps what is needed is a rewrite of the rules.

Gli · Jul 11, 2007, 09:58 AM // 09:58

Rules of conduct are supposed to carry a bit of fuzzyness that's handled at the discretion of the people responsible for enforcing them. If they'd be completely unequivocal and set into stone, there'd be no way to act against people finding loopholes. The rules (explicitly) state you can't cause distress to other players, and that's all they need to say. It's up to the powers that be to decide when and where distress has been caused of sufficient magnitude to warrant action. Maliciously breaking up an 80 person guild has to rank pretty high I'd expect.

Xenex Xclame · Jul 11, 2007, 10:35 AM // 10:35

Why are you so against the idea of making everyone officers ?
How does that prevent the Leader from having a life?

Like miral said the way the rules are written, saying hello to someone can be enough for a ban.

I agree with some here saying that it's something that should be handled by the guild.

It is the guild leaders responsibility no matter what, by promoting him he passes down his powers to be used as the player promoted seems fit,otherwise they should not be promoted.

If the leader can not handle whatever decision the officer makes , then the leader should NOT promote the person(s)

You said it yourself , its up to the Anet to decide if anything should be done and they seem to agree with us, that this is something that should be handled by the guild not by them, with this post you are trying to decide how they should act.