Should guilds with 0% activity be disbanded?

Ibonic · #1 01-05-2007, 07:31 PM

This is not a guarantee that they will or won't be, especially since I haven't fully discussed it with Unixmad yet. But I know some of you are complaining constantly about all of the inactive guilds, so I would like to know what the majority of your opinions are for this partial¹ solution.

{self-comment: It would be nice if we had some kind of global in-game voting system to cover more players, hmm...}

Anyway,
Do you think guilds with 0% activity should be disbanded?
If so, after how long? 2 weeks, a month, 6 months?

If this is implemented, I would like to have some kind of warning system in place so that the guild leader and other members have a chance at preventing it. I believe this has been suggested elsewhere in the forums.

Please keep in mind that I am aware of other guild issues and that I want to take care of them all in time, but this thread isn't meant to discuss them right now.
Let's try for one thing at a time and maybe they'll eventually get done.

¹ It's possible that in the future we could do something additional such as require a certain number of members to be on tag per month, which was also suggested. But again, one thing at a time for now.

Chris · #2 01-05-2007, 07:36 PM

After 1-2 months of inactivity.

Crono · #3 01-05-2007, 07:36 PM

So a guild with tons of history and such would get deleted?

I don't like this.

Crimson2005 · #4 01-05-2007, 07:37 PM

1 month of inactivity

hampy · #5 01-05-2007, 07:38 PM

I vote yes, after 1 month of inactivity. But the leader of the guild should be told to sort it out after say 3 weeks

nikomi946 · #6 01-05-2007, 07:54 PM

I would say a 6 month time frame since many who are in college and universities often have rather long absences but do return. Or there's that nasty addiction to other online games that often keep them away for awhile.

Ibonic · #7 01-05-2007, 08:09 PM

I guess maybe this also shouldn't apply if the guild leader has an active VIP (or Gold?) subscription.

Rufus · #8 01-05-2007, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibonic

I guess maybe this also shouldn't apply if the guild leader has an active VIP (or Gold?) subscription.

Yes, that's perfect.

This would add function to VIP (ignore the Gold, in my opinion that's for different purposes).

Googi · #9 01-05-2007, 08:18 PM

How about giving us an explanation of what "0% activity" means? How inactive does a guild have to be for its activity to go to 0%?

kia345 · #10 01-05-2007, 08:19 PM

no they shouldnt be disbanded...

for the same reason as crono, the historic guilds deserve to stay. RR, meep, all them guilds =(

Rufus · #11 01-05-2007, 08:21 PM

There are currently 334 guilds with 0% activity

Minoc · #12 01-05-2007, 08:24 PM

%0 activity, after a month.
Old guilds (5 years or older) should stay regardless.

Luda · #13 01-05-2007, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minoc

%0 activity, after a month.
Old guilds (5 years or older) should stay regardless.

Yeah, I like that idea Minoc :]

Darlene159 · #14 01-05-2007, 08:33 PM

yes, after 1 month of inactivity.

I would say that a guild leader should have another person to take over if they have to go away for an extended amount of time, if they care about the guild.

I also do not know if I agree that very old guilds should stay no matter what. Inactivity is inactivity.
Or , if the old guild is to stay, someone should be appointed acting leader, or something, to make it avtive again.

Minoc · #15 01-05-2007, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darlene159

Or , if the old guild is to stay, someone should be appointed acting leader, or something, to make it avtive again.

If the guild has %0 of activity, who could be appointed leader?

Curt1zzle · #16 01-05-2007, 08:43 PM

I voted no, but I have no argument.

Chompy · #17 01-05-2007, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darlene159

if the old guild is to stay, someone should be appointed acting leader, or something, to make it active again.

Well, would be hard to make 'paused' active again ( over 0%)
It is currently at -1619%

Well, I am not against it, but would be hard to keep old known guilds and such..

Ibonic · #18 01-05-2007, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chompy

Well, would be hard to make 'paused' active again ( over 0%)
It is currently at -1619%

...

That's its rating, the activity percentile is currently 4.2%

Chompy · #19 01-05-2007, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibonic

That's its rating, the activity percentile is currently 4.2%

hmm, my bad

Ok, I agree now, with this :o

Crow · #20 01-05-2007, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minoc

%0 activity, after a month.
Old guilds (5 years or older) should stay regardless.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rufus

Yes, that's perfect.

This would add function to VIP (ignore the Gold, in my opinion that's for different purposes).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibonic

I guess maybe this also shouldn't apply if the guild leader has an active VIP (or Gold?) subscription.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hampy

I vote yes, after 1 month of inactivity. But the leader of the guild should be told to sort it out after say 3 weeks

<3

maximus_asinus · #21 01-05-2007, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crimson2005

1 month of inactivity

I agree, one month is plenty of time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hampy

I vote yes, after 1 month of inactivity. But the leader of the guild should be told to sort it out after say 3 weeks

Possibly an e-mail, or even an NPC server notification, with the warning.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikomi946

I would say a 6 month time frame since many who are in college and universities often have rather long absences but do return. Or there's that nasty addiction to other online games that often keep them away for awhile.

If the ENTIRE guild is away to University... well, I don't know, that just sounds so stupid. Disban the guild.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibonic

I guess maybe this also shouldn't apply if the guild leader has an active VIP (or Gold?) subscription.

No, everyone should be effected, they are neglecting/ignoring their guild, and just burdening the guild system having inactive guilds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minoc

%0 activity, after a month.
Old guilds (5 years or older) should stay regardless.

I agree, and disagree. I'd love to see them stay, it serves as a reminder to old times, but at the same time I want everyone to be treated equally, and if the guilds were allowed to die out completely, they should finish the cycle and be disbanned. Maybe an immunity list, once old guilds like this are disbanned, they are not allowed to be remade?

Crono · #22 01-05-2007, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darlene159

I would say that a guild leader should have another person to take over if they have to go away for an extended amount of time, if they care about the guild..

i dont think guilds should be policed like this...

Triple_Darkness · #23 01-05-2007, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gerami

i dont think guilds should be policed like this...

It help's finding what guild that's active that you want to join instead of looking though ton's of unactive guild's which make's it quite harder to find what your working for and becuase more than half of those page's are filled with 0% activity...1 Month is good yes

Darlene159 · #24 01-05-2007, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minoc

If the guild has %0 of activity, who could be appointed leader?

Good point, then it should be removed like any other guild. What is the sense of having a guild with 0 activity?

Triple_Darkness · #25 01-05-2007, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minoc

If the guild has %0 of activity, who could be appointed leader?

Maybe the person that has the most activity? if the Leader hasnt don anything about the guild in a month. The most Active person in that guild become's Guild Leader (if VIP) and if it doesnt work in a few week's it is therefore disbaned?
[edit]It has it around what 10 maybe 5 for it to stay living? and if it git's 0 again its disbaned?[/edit]

Darlene159 · #26 01-05-2007, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Triple_Darkness

Maybe the person that has the most activity? and if it doesnt work in a week it is therefore disbaneded

lol, the point was alread made there if there is 0 activity, then there is 0 activity.

Chompy · #27 01-05-2007, 10:38 PM

hmm, what if the guild just barely makes like 0.1% - 0.2% and it won't be disbaneded.. that sounds weird :o

WanDaMan · #28 01-05-2007, 10:44 PM

If I were the only one still wearing my tag on & off - would my guild be removed?

Triple_Darkness · #29 01-05-2007, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WanDaMan

If I were the only one still wearing my tag on & off - would my guild be removed?

If the Activity isnt 0 and is like 0.1 then no it wouldn't :O

WanDaMan · #30 01-05-2007, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Triple_Darkness

If the Activity isnt 0 and is like 0.1 then no it wouldn't :O

Ok, fair enough. Is the % of activity determined by the number of people within the guild?

Ibonic · #31 01-05-2007, 10:55 PM

Quote:

'Activity Percentile' (AP) is simply the percentage of Guild members that had put on the Guild Tag at least once within the past week (7 days). The value is rounded to one decimal.

Example: Your Guild has 48 members. 38 of them were online in the past 7 days and each had the Guild Tag on. Your Guild's AP would be: (38 / 48) x 100% = 79.2%

It should be extremely easy to keep a guild's activity > 0%; even one person can do it. So really this would only get rid of guilds that nobody (in the guild) seems to care about. In a way it makes me feel we should go by a higher percentage, but at least 0% is a start.

WanDaMan · #32 01-05-2007, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibonic

It should be extremely easy to keep a guild's activity > 0%; even one person can do it. So really this would only get rid of guilds that nobody (in the guild) seems to care about. In a way it makes me feel we should go by a higher percentage, but at least 0% is a start.

Thanks for those figures! I'm not a huge fan of any of this; the majority of people within my guild have left graal. I believe you should take in to consideration the ammount of people in the guild before you disbanden it aswell as several other key factors before you delete it because of it being inactive.

Darlene159 · #33 01-05-2007, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibonic

It should be extremely easy to keep a guild's activity > 0%; even one person can do it. So really this would only get rid of guilds that nobody (in the guild) seems to care about. In a way it makes me feel we should go by a higher percentage, but at least 0% is a start.

Totally agree.

Devil · #34 01-06-2007, 12:23 AM

I really hope we don't see good guilds with an awesome history go down the drain.

Darlene159 · #35 01-06-2007, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Devil

I really hope we don't see good guilds with an awesome history go down the drain.

History isn't worth squat if no one is wearing their tags in the guild.
If it were removed, maybe someone could remake it...I know it wouldn't be the same, but it is better then a completely dead guild.

Infernix · #36 01-06-2007, 12:34 AM

I voted Yes but then thought about ACT...and I wouldnt want that disbanned.

Triple_Darkness · #37 01-06-2007, 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Devil

I really hope we don't see good guilds with an awesome history go down the drain.

Plus to what Darlene said If it was THAT great then it wouldn't be forgotten in our Heart's. DUHHHH

Devil · #38 01-06-2007, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darlene159

History isn't worth squat if no one is wearing their tags in the guild.
If it were removed, maybe someone could remake it...I know it wouldn't be the same, but it is better then a completely dead guild.

I wouldn't want some newb bringing back Legend. It would totally defeat the purpose of how many people are left in it, and who was in it, for those reasons.

To the post above me, it isn't about forgotten guilds, it's about members growing up and leaving graal.

Triple_Darkness · #39 01-06-2007, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Devil

I wouldn't want some newb bringing back Legend. It would totally defeat the purpose of how many people are left in it, and who was in it, for those reasons.

To the post above me, it isn't about forgotten guilds, it's about members growing up and leaving graal.

What you're basicly saying is that "Guild's that's been with Graal for a long time and now its going to deleted and the hisory of that _____ (name here) will be lost and forgotten" and if you dont want noob's making it over well as what you have to in Life is to Deal about it

Devil · #40 01-06-2007, 12:49 AM

Please don't write posts to me, unless you can put some intelligence into them.

I know exactly what is going on, I _REALLY_ could care less if every guild were deleted.

View Poll Results: Should guilds with 0% activity be disbanded?
Yes	53	70.67%
No	22	29.33%
Voters: 75. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode