Jagged Coast Guilds Alliance

Aooi Profile Options #21

0

Shiada on 04/18/2012, 09:22 AM - view
The new changes are worse than before that would give VO complete discretion on who to kick! no even if the drama clause is still in it certainly won't be up to ONE guild to decide when enough is enough. I do respect you spearheading this alliance but I doubt anyone is agreeing to you being in charge of it. I somehow suspect that it wasn't your attention with this change but this gives one guild too much power. I feel as if the terms of this alliance need to be decided as a group.



-Zach GM of Avenged
http://avengedtera.enjin.com/


I worded it incorrectly, I apologize for the confusion.

My meaning behind the "kicking" aspect is this:
If the entire community of guilds as a whole feels that a specific guild causes or provokes too much drama, then we will talk to them. Basically, it is still up to popular vote, except we volunteer to do the dirty work of telling a guild that they're acting too immature. I'll change things to clarify.

Also, to other replies:

I understand the concern for disallowing guilds to participate in these tournaments. However, our main and primary focus is in fact maturity. What can we do if there is absolutely no punishment for letting your guild run wild in area chat? If you're screaming, cursing, bad-mouthing, and exploiting other guilds, that's a problem that needs to stop. We don't need an immature server.

As I said, we understand that you cannot control all your members. We understand that you cannot stop them from acting in such a manner. But the mere mention of it may reduce their behavior by that much. We don't ask for much, we just want drama to decrease. It would take a lot for a guild to get removed. But if there's no removal then all this is, is a tournament website. It's no longer a community, it's no longer a way to keep drama to a minimum. It's just a tournament.

Drama in general is against the terms of service. I know I'm pulling a pretty negative card when I say this, but it's entirely true; drama usually involves insults, harassment, cursing, bad-mouthing, etc. All those aspects are indeed against the terms of service. If a Game Master is to be sponsoring the prizes for these tournaments, then your guilds should at least attempt to follow the terms of service. I'm not saying you need to follow it perfectly, but at least attempt to.

There's a pretty large difference between attempting to fix drama and not caring at all. Take a look at the drama between VO and GM. I can say that if we weren't trying to suppress that drama, all hell would erupt, and we would be arguing and screaming against every post either guild makes. We attempt to suppress by simply mentioning "no one should badmouth GM." Just by saying that, the tension decreased significantly. There were still some cases of drama, and after those cases, we pulled members aside and told them to shut up once again.

The point is, if you're planning on trying to participate in these tournaments, you need to behave your guild. If your guild is acting so incredibly horrible that the majority of other guilds see your guild as a public nuisance, then you won't be in the tournament. If your guild is mature enough and not filled with people who will begin spamming the forums or chats with exploitation, harassment, and insults, then you should have no problem with this clause.
Edited by: Aooi about 1 year ago
Shiada Profile Options #22

0

Aooi on 04/18/2012, 12:15 PM - view
Shiada on 04/18/2012, 09:22 AM
The new changes are worse than before that would give VO complete discretion on who to kick! no even if the drama clause is still in it certainly won't be up to ONE guild to decide when enough is enough. I do respect you spearheading this alliance but I doubt anyone is agreeing to you being in charge of it. I somehow suspect that it wasn't your attention with this change but this gives one guild too much power. I feel as if the terms of this alliance need to be decided as a group.



-Zach GM of Avenged
http://avengedtera.enjin.com/


I worded it incorrectly, I apologize for the confusion.

My meaning behind the "kicking" aspect is this:
If the entire community of guilds as a whole feels that a specific guild causes or provokes too much drama, then we will talk to them. Basically, it is still up to popular vote, except we volunteer to do the dirty work of telling a guild that they're acting too immature. I'll change things to clarify.



Ok I still would think that the "dirty work" would need to be done by all guilds involved so that the offending guilds in question could plead their case. I still disagree with the drama clause mostly because i think it simply will not work, I think that it should be taken to a vote on the first meeting, either way this has our continued support. looking forward to playing with you all tomorrow!



-Zach GM of Avenged
http://avengedtera.enjin.com/
Edited by: Shiada about 1 year ago
Aooi Profile Options #23

0

Shiada on 04/18/2012, 12:25 PM - view

Ok I still would think that the "dirty work" would need to be done by all guilds involved so that the offending guilds in question could plead their case. I still disagree with the drama clause mostly because i think it simply will not work, I think that it should be taken to a vote on the first meeting, either way this has our continued support. looking forward to playing with you all tomorrow!



-Zach GM of Avenged
http://avengedtera.enjin.com/


It will work. All a guild master has to do is tell their member to stop causing drama. That alone will make the guild member understand that he or she is becoming a nuisance and continued drama may result in punishment. Just the mention of it is enough to decrease guild drama by possibly even half. I edited my post explaining how. This will be taken in to a vote.
Xessos Profile Options #24

0

Shiada on 04/18/2012, 12:25 PM - view
Aooi on 04/18/2012, 12:15 PM
Shiada on 04/18/2012, 09:22 AM
The new changes are worse than before that would give VO complete discretion on who to kick! no even if the drama clause is still in it certainly won't be up to ONE guild to decide when enough is enough. I do respect you spearheading this alliance but I doubt anyone is agreeing to you being in charge of it. I somehow suspect that it wasn't your attention with this change but this gives one guild too much power. I feel as if the terms of this alliance need to be decided as a group.



-Zach GM of Avenged
http://avengedtera.enjin.com/


I worded it incorrectly, I apologize for the confusion.

My meaning behind the "kicking" aspect is this:
If the entire community of guilds as a whole feels that a specific guild causes or provokes too much drama, then we will talk to them. Basically, it is still up to popular vote, except we volunteer to do the dirty work of telling a guild that they're acting too immature. I'll change things to clarify.



Ok I still would think that the "dirty work" would need to be done by all guilds involved so that the offending guilds in question could plead their case. I still disagree with the drama clause mostly because i think it simply will not work, I think that it should be taken to a vote on the first meeting, either way this has our continued support. looking forward to playing with you all tomorrow!



-Zach GM of Avenged
http://avengedtera.enjin.com/


I think ultimately trying to avoid drama should be a given. It is always good to put it out there for the extra insurance, but I think that is the most anyone can say within reason. I feel like we are kind of beating a dead horse at this point.

I also agree that if the removal of a guild occurs it should not rest in one guild to deliver that message per se.

I could imagine a variety of things such as a rotation, or a person most deserving to deliver the verdict (e.g. the guild that eas most wronged by them, etc.)

For the record I know I have done a lot of nit picking, but I largely support the idea of a unified system like this. So keep it up!
Edited by: Xessos about 1 year ago