Curse

Rayne Nightfyre · May 05, 2006, 06:21 PM // 18:21

I've been reading some other threads regarding this, and some have a valid point I seemed to overlook. From the thread "Alliance Chat Only Officers and Leaders":

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaek

You have two guilds, A and B.

The guildleader of A decides that he wants to allow all his members to use Alliance chat.

However the members of B do not want to have to deal with that.

Now the members of B are forced to turn off Alliance chat, /ignore people, or flat out leave the Alliance.

All just because guildleader A thinks that Alliance chat is the coolest and wants all his guildies to be able to play with the neat new chat channel.

That could likely happen, so perhaps the Alliance Leader could be the only one with this option instead of each individual guild leader. But I do feel something needs to be changed, it's simply not fair to assume that every alliance would get out of hand if all members could use alliance chat.

mr_boo · May 05, 2006, 10:49 PM // 22:49

/signed Most Def!

I think it's a bit naive for some to assume that having Alliance Chat implemented in such a static fashion is sufficient for all or most Guilds. The ability to adjust and toggle options for a Chat Channel would provide the most flexiblity and would grant Guilds the ability to customize that Chat Channel to their liking.

Tuesg · May 05, 2006, 10:56 PM // 22:56

/signed

I can see it but i can't use it, it gets annoying.

Dark Suoon · May 06, 2006, 03:28 AM // 03:28

/never ever signed

10 guilds with 100 ppl ea guild= destruction!

Epinephrine · May 06, 2006, 04:07 AM // 04:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rayne Nightfyre

I've been reading some other threads regarding this, and some have a valid point I seemed to overlook. From the thread "Alliance Chat Only Officers and Leaders":

...

That could likely happen, so perhaps the Alliance Leader could be the only one with this option instead of each individual guild leader. But I do feel something needs to be changed, it's simply not fair to assume that every alliance would get out of hand if all members could use alliance chat.

If you check out my suggestion in this post it addresses that. The guild leader has a toggle beside each guild in alliance, with "Receive member chat (off/on), receive officer chat (off/on)" and other options. This allows one guild to set alliance chat on all members, but a guild who finds the chatter too much to limit the incoming from the other guild to just the leader or just the officers. Since each guild sets how it wants to receive and transmit (and I added other things, like guest privileges to guild hall, etc...) you don't have spam issues on a guild level - each simply tweaks it till they are comfortable.

Make it flexible to suit all players - you don't want tons of chat? That's fine. You want full communication? Also doable. You want to extend the guild hall privilege to an entire guild, rather than inviting each member every day if they want to party up? Sure, why not - you are aliies after all. You don't want your online roster shown? Set it to hidden - or leave itt visible and have all others able to see it. There's no limit to haow much this could improve communication and ease making of groups, but implemented as it is it's needlessly restrictive.

Omnidragon42 · May 06, 2006, 05:06 AM // 05:06

/Not Signed
My guild [XoO] has over 400 members, if everyone could use alliance with no moderation, things could get hectic. Maybe the leader of the alliance could have a switch for who to allow it for? That would be the best option imho.

Mandy Memory · May 06, 2006, 05:13 AM // 05:13

/signed (and im in one of those big guilds)

sinisters chaos · May 06, 2006, 07:06 AM // 07:06

/signed
why would ANYONE disagree that an option for the guild leader to allow or not allow his members to use the alliance chat would be a good idea

also, i would rather be spammed in alliance chat than in whispers any day, knowing u cant turn off whispers.

Akhilleus · May 06, 2006, 07:26 AM // 07:26

/signed...
...once again, if its optional i dont see how its a problem...
and besides, a guild should have enough officers to be able to take care of the problem, should there be one.
i got on guildwars at 10:00 AM this morning, when i had 4 officers online and played till i left for work, the lowest officer count we had today was 0, but i was online, half an hour later we had 2 officers on.
after i got back from work/bar at about 11:00 PM and have been online for 3 hours; its 2:30 AM and we still have 3 officers online, and myself (3/9 officers). and chances are, 1-2 of those officers will be on till 4-6 AM...this schedual is reapeatd daily.
any compitent guild leader should take it upon himself to notice whose active at different times, and promote accordingly, so that theres always an officer on, or the leader themsleves.
they should also make it clear that abuse of guild features is frowned upon.
the option to allow it should be there...if a guild cannot regulate it, they can turn it off, but those of us who know how to run our guilds should not be punished.

Laibeus Lord · May 06, 2006, 07:43 AM // 07:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Epinephrine

Instead of re-directing folks to YOUR thread, just sign here. One thread is enough; if you want them to read your suggestion, even if it pre-dates this thread, just refer to it here, as I did.

We need one highly visible, post-full thread, not eight small threads quickly buried by demands for minipet battles, new faces, quivers for rangers or +4 more AL for customizing shields, and I don't think anyone cares whose thread it is. Just put the pertinent info in here, and keep this thread visible.

Perhaps a mod will be kind enough to merge the alliance chat threads?

Obviously the title of this thread is "Alliance chat - access for all" and thus many other signatories are quickly replying with "/unsigned". That should be clear enough why a different thread was posted.

To get good /signs we need a clear thread and a subject so people will read first before replying with /unsign or /sign. Its human nature to react after reading the "subject" line of the thread and therefore in this case, they /unsign quickly. I'll do the same.

Just read a few posts above and people were saying "why would anyone /unsign an option for leaders to choose who gets access?" -type of comments.

my two cents.

so /unsign for me for "Access for all".

Tals · May 06, 2006, 07:51 AM // 07:51

I think the idea makes sense. 400 members in a Guild isn't so much. Maybe it should be down to the individuals whether they want to see officer chat or grunts chat as well.

I'd certainly like an option to see who on the alliance is online.

Tals

Carinae · May 11, 2006, 09:08 PM // 21:08

My suggestion...Please give us:

An Alliance channel that can be used by ANY alliance member.

AND

An Officer channel that can only be used by officers (only visible to officers as well?)

This solves all issues, I think. Both channels can be disabled in case of huge guilds/spam but could also allow free communication among alliance mates.

Tals · May 11, 2006, 09:50 PM // 21:50

after a week of not being able to post in alliance chat when i'm up for some action most definitely /signed

zhai · May 11, 2006, 10:05 PM // 22:05

/signed - especially Carinae Dragonblood's idea

zerowingcats · May 11, 2006, 10:08 PM // 22:08

/signed because there have been times where there was no guild leader/officer on in my guild.

BrandonIT · May 11, 2006, 10:25 PM // 22:25

/signed.

No officers sometimes are on. Not being able to participate is frustrating.

If the toggle will make it more widely accepted, then fine. Otherwise, just give it to us all. Not all of us have 4 x 60 member guilds. Some of us are in much smaller alliances. Spam will almost certainly not be an issue for mine.

Besides, the turnaround argument to the "your guild leader should promote more officers" is "your guild leaders should be able to control any spamming guildies."

kaya · May 12, 2006, 09:41 PM // 21:41

bringing the conversation over from the new thread.. that just got booted!

(off topic)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jessyi

Is that so MCS? Because I heard ANet will do anything we ask them only when the search actually works. Unless you're on GWGuru between the hours of 1AM and 4AM, forget about it actually being enabled. Of course, I'm sure you knew that didn't you...

amen to that. it's been almost a month now that i've been able to use the search command properly... maybe i need to stay up late just so i can use it right. and the google search is never very helpful... enough with the use the search command comments until it's actually up to speed itself.
(off topic)

(back on topic)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jessyi

Anyways, on a related note, I support the OPs suggestion. There are simply situations in which it would be useful for guild members to use the alliance chat channel, and hey, if you are in an alliance with 2874728734 guilds, then I have another suggestion. Get ready for this, you're going to love it: My suggestion is that the guild leader of the guild heading the alliance can toggle who can use the alliance chat, be it all members, officers/leaders, or leaders only! Hot diggety damn!

-Jessyi

/signed this would be a simple solution. I'd actually go as far as saying not only toggle it for members or leaders, but maybe even for each specific member. Say you have a member you just dont want f-ing up your relationship with your alliance, cause he got a track record of blowing up, then you have the option to turn his alliance chat off, and leave the rest on.

naveh3 · May 12, 2006, 10:28 PM // 22:28

/signed....

let the officers detemine who can talk .... like toggle each member alliance privillage :P

really this thing is needed and im talking as an officer not a member... it is very needed...

mariano · May 13, 2006, 11:03 AM // 11:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alana

I understand the reasons ANet did it this way, but I think giving the guild leaders the option of having it available to all members would be very nice. I suppose if there are two small guilds, they should just merge to one, but I don't like how it seems like they are forced into that decision for the sake of easier communication. Ah well.

Anyway, /signed for leaders to toggle this option.

/signed

Either leaders or officers... think: when all leaders agree all members of the alliance may chat, but if one leader disagrees it would not be.

Tals · May 13, 2006, 03:30 PM // 15:30

/notsigned regarding Officers deciding on chat.

Lets go for Alliance officers chat and a general alliance. Those who don't want to hear alliance chitter chatter can turn it off and still hear their beloved officers talk

Tals