|
Post by Beagle on Nov 10, 2010 16:00:48 GMT -5
What would everyone like to see in an expanded clan leadership set of features? Our biggest question right now is what to do about clans when its leader becomes inactive. Should we give leadership control to the highest level ninja in the clan? Should we disband the clan? Should we force an election? Should leadership go to the first person that clicks a link to take control?
Anyone have any ideas for how this should work?
|
|
|
Post by annihilate on Nov 10, 2010 18:03:18 GMT -5
The leader could have the ability to select a co-leader of sorts, and in the event that the leader goes inactive, the co-leader would become the leader. If the clan leader doesn't bother to select one, then well, I guess it makes no difference either way because they don't care.
The co-leader, I suppose should have every ability the leader does besides disbanding it and changing the name.
|
|
|
Post by Beagle on Nov 10, 2010 18:20:58 GMT -5
should the co-leader get disband and rename if the leader goes inactive? What if the co-leader is inactive?
|
|
|
Post by annihilate on Nov 10, 2010 20:48:22 GMT -5
Yes, if the leader goes inactive then the co-leader should become the leader after a certain amount of days I guess.
If both the leader and co-leader become inactive then I don't think the clan is meant to be.
|
|
|
Post by Beagle on Nov 11, 2010 8:58:37 GMT -5
So the clan should be completely disbanded at that point?
|
|
|
Post by annihilate on Nov 11, 2010 18:08:56 GMT -5
I think the clan should be deleted along with the the leader and co-leader if they go inactive.
Eh, I guess it could be:
-Able to give "co-leader" to another member. -If leader is inactive for X days(15?), the co-leader becomes the new leader and the leader becomes a the co-leader(can be removed from position if he/she remains inactive OR the old leader could just become regular member?). -If both the co-leader and the leader go inactive for X days(30?), the clan could be disbanded. -If a co-leader is NOT selected then every rule applies just without a co-leader. -The co-leader has every ability of the Leader with exceptions being the ability to: Disband the clan and re-name the clan.
I think this would solve the problem of tons of clans sitting there with one person in it as well as the above ideas disbanding improperly organized ones if it is made so a clan with only 1 member in it is inactive for 7 days, the clan is disbanded.
|
|
|
Post by Tchalvak on Nov 15, 2010 21:06:30 GMT -5
Here's the thing:
Clans are, (hopefully not too far) down the line, going to gain functionality, including: bank functionality (items, gold) physical clanhall-having functionality guarding-of-their-members functionality
Because of that, the concept of "disbanding" a clan is going to get very very hard. Similarly, creating a clan is going to have to get a lot harder/more complicated as well, to avoid having too many of 'em.
This is half of why we need better leadership fallbacks. Because clans being useful is somewhat dependent on their officers, and clans are going to have a lot of power investment coming from their members, and those members aren't going to like the clan becoming inactive despite that they've put effort into it.
So disbanding of clans with any kind of built-up stuff to them should become a rarity, because too much will be invested in clans. And clans should have someone who can effect change active almost all the time, otherwise some kind of system should kick in to -give- active people power to effect change in the clan. Leaderlessness should effectively become a thing of the past.
|
|