Save Our Guilds

[DeletedUser99438]

I don't personally understand why any one person should be able to dissolve an entire guild, if I'm honest. To safeguard the interests of all the members invested in the guild, it makes more sense to have a feature that doesn't allow a guild to be dissolved unless all the active members leave, in which it happens then on an automated basis. But to be honest there's probably no way to implement any safeguard, since the founder can just remove everyone and then leave. Which is also an issue with Proposal 1, if the founder is hellbent on destroying the guild, it only takes a few moments to remove all the members and then dissolve. Proposal 2 has similar issues, as a founder can just remove all the founders rights before s/he applies to dissolve and then no other founders are there to refute it. The only other way to stop that is by removing the right of a founder to remove founders but that could pose other issues, so I doubt that's a solution to the problem.

Dissolving a guild requires two clicks, so can't see how that is accidentally done, but who knows. Deleting GBs requires the member to tick an additional box before confirmation of the delete. Perhaps this could be a good addition to add to prevent the accidental deletion of a guild.

Your idea of a cooling off period is a good idea, at least it gives players time to try to find a resolution with the founder.

 

[Agent327]

Wow you really have never been in a top guild have you. A really good top guild has 2 sometimes 3 players as founders because the work load is really high and top guilds must cover the problems one founder can create. Suggest you ask to join a top guild and see how much work there is in managing it and all the relationships so critical to gvg. You really showed your lack of experience and that you have never even been in a top guild with that post

Never in a top guild??? Man, don't you know that I don't even play the game?

A founder is the idiot that started the Guild. Leaders are the ones who steer it.

 

[DeletedUser653]

Never in a top guild??? Man, don't you know that I don't even play the game?
........

So all your sugestions are rubbish and yout should really be kicked off the forum, but i suspect you do play the game but are just not very good and in a crap guild that means you really have no idea how to play the game, hence all the terriable posts!!

 

[Agent327]

So all your sugestions are rubbish and yout should really be kicked off the forum, but i suspect you do play the game but are just not very good and in a crap guild that means you really have no idea how to play the game, hence all the terriable posts!!

That must be it. It's the go to answer in every argument you are not looking that good.

 

[DeletedUser653]

Why not trying to read the op origin suggestion and commenting on this after you have understand it
1) if one founder - they have the right to disband as they want, gno change here
2) if 2 founders, then there must always be 2 founders at all times and both must delete the guild or it is not deleted
3) if 3 or more founders, a majority must delete the guild

 

[Agent327]

3) if 3 or more founders, a majority must delete the guild

Majority of the guild or the founders.

Even so, 1 founder can delete all members!!!

 

[DeletedUser99438]

I hate to say but he is right (I'll wash my mouth out now but as a friend of mine says, even a stopped clock is right twice a day!! haha) unless a feature is included that revokes the right to remove a founder, there is no way around a solid safeguard.

If that feature can't be instilled without hindering other aspects, the cooling off period seems to be a good idea that can at least provide a platform in which guild members have some time to resolve the issues that caused the motion to dissolve.

 

[TheKingOfKool]

Same Old; Same Old - useless help - only derogatory remarks - lol - What a great life you are living

 

[DeletedUser99438]

Agent is another story aye, no refuting that. But unfortunately KingOfKool that is the reality of the situation in this case. It might be better to redirect the idea and propose a feature that revokes the right to remove a founder and then propose the idea of making it only possible to dissolve a guild with a majority vote of founders. I don't honestly know if that could be reasonably implemented though, something for a discussion I guess.

But aye I agree, it really is unfair and even wrong that one member can easily dissolve a guild and destroy the hard efforts of all concerned. If something can be implemented to change that, it should be implemented.