Club cadavers

[vanaigor]

Hi

It's a shame mi club we have only 7 active member with 15 cadavers including the Boss, who doesn't play over 70 days and other players who are off more than that.

That's no opportunities to remove player when the Boss is missing. How many club are in the same situation and they can't progress. 

Should the developer make a little change to avoid this problem?. 

[DvDivXXX]

This is a relatively classic complaint (about the club leader becoming inactive without passing the torch to another member first), and you have made no suggestion, here.

[vanaigor]

Make a second leader with that take the rule management of the club when the leader is inactive for long time

[natstar]

The only thing taht you can do is join a new club but no refund on what you spent on club upgrades.

if you wanted to make a suggestion you could suggest getting some or all of what you spent on club upgrades when you leave then it does not matter if your club leader stop playing or was banned.

[vanaigor]

Even some the strongest club has cadaves as leader. It must be something that the developer can do and it's put has coleader the most active player so that player can clean all the cadavers of the Club, actually in mine, they are only 5 member who still playing.

[vanaigor]

It will be gratefully that the game (Developers) will add a routine that make able that the dead Leader (Long time not gaming, well a cadaver) can be removed by a co-leader.

That will add to whole game more interactive fighting, making the Club more attractive when you give a chance to be leader. The player will try to surpass their own limits, put also some more things in the club (Put more level and new skil), make that part of the game (club) more attractive.

A little job for great benefits.

[DvDivXXX]

4 hours ago, vanaigor said:

coleader the most active player so that player can clean all the cadavers of the Club

Yes, we got you loud and clear the firs few times. Please don't bump your own topic just to repeat yourself.

[Pelinor]

11 hours ago, vanaigor said:

It must be something that the developer can do and it's put has coleader the most active player

Most active in what way? Times logged in, time spent in the game, most contributions, length of time in the club, or something else? As for the Club owner assigning a co-leader, I do not see that option in my club's settings. I would welcome that change since it promotes club stability even though I have no plans on leaving the game.

[Fifefinger]

my clubleader are 65 Days offline and many other member over 100 Days. can we have a offline-border like the Game cuntwars? If a Member 14 Days offline, the System KI kick him out from the club? With no leader, the club can not kick the dead corps and it is useless to upgrade the club.

THX

Edited October 25, 2020 by Fifefinger

[Fiel]

I suggest implementing a democratic voting system to implement something like a vice president, below the founder. Something like every month, or every 3 months, or every 6 months, whatever is more reasonable and easy.

So if the founder isn't around, you can still manage the club to a limited degree.

But the founder will still be safe and can't have his club hijacked.

[Fifefinger]

"his" Club?!? if i look into the Club and count the Upgrades from the Clubmembers, i see that many "Members" spend more than the "Clubleader".

in my Eyes the leader only "make/open" the Club, but the Members give "my" Club a "life" and the most upgrads. The Members talk together. The "leader" get offline without a notice. Maybe he is ill, maybe he died. Nobody knows.

But now what shall we do?

We few "fighting" Clubmembers  can open a new Club, but our "money" are lost. So we still waiting and hope a Gameupgrade save our club and give him a new life! with a new aktive leader

Edited October 25, 2020 by Fifefinger

[Fiel]

6 hours ago, Fifefinger said:

"his" Club?!?

You have to ask yourself, is there a reason why the developers have done nothing to help your side?

Perhaps the developers are siding with the founder to protect their rights. If so, then it's your job to find a compromise, or else you will get Nothing.

Be smart, be pragmatical-

[Pelinor]

As a club owner, I appreciate the developer's dedication to protecting my position as the owner. What I would love to see is giving the owner a way to assign another club member the ability to remove inactive members based on time. In my idea, the Club Chairperson could not remove the owner and could only remove members who were inactive for 30-45-60 days (my choice as the Club Owner).

 

To ensure club continuation, I would also give the owner a Club Chairperson setting, allowing a new chairperson to be chosen by members via a short PoA style event if both the owner and chairperson became inactive for whatever reason.

 

To protect club members' rights and investments, I would set it so the club owner could not disband a club without a majority of the members agreeing to the club's dissolution.

Edited October 26, 2020 by Pelinor
fleshing out my thoughts on the matter

[windia]

2 hours ago, Pelinor said:

[...] To protect club members' rights and investments, I would set it so the club owner could not disband a club without a majority of the members agreeing to the club's dissolution.

And how to do you distinct "club owner fires a member" from "club owner fires a member one after the other so that none is left"?

[Pelinor]

15 minutes ago, windia said:

And how to do you distinct "club owner fires a member" from "club owner fires a member one after the other so that none is left"?

If I understand your question correctly, How about tieing membership protections to the Chairperson setting so that a member could not be kicked from a club as long as they maintained the minimum activity setting. Example: The Chairperson cannot kick a member until they have been inactive for 30-45-60 days (owner setting), so not even the owner can kick a person until they have been inactive for that period of time.

 

Another thought has occurred to me. If the club owner has gone inactive, the Club setting should go back to the default "open membership" setting, so the club doesn't die due to the inability to accept new players into the club.

Edited October 26, 2020 by Pelinor

[Kenrae]

Many of these suggestions are good, but first they should add an ingame option to add a second club administrator, which is much easier to do.

[Pelinor]

6 minutes ago, Kenrae said:

Many of these suggestions are good, but first they should add an ingame option to add a second club administrator, which is much easier to do.

I agree; the first step is to define and add the Chairperson/2nd Administrator position to the Club. Either as an owner's choice (my preference) or an in-club game where the winner gets the spot or (my least favorite idea) a random selection by the game once the club reaches the level one membership cap. The club owner should have an option to replace/change the Chairperson without kicking them out of the club no matter which option the game developers decide to implement.

[Rasbhari]

I am newbie in this game. But every game with club/association setting, either promotes most active(interactive) member to replace president(14-30 day absence) OR has a co-leader system (with top performers getting it automatically).

 

 

[Pelinor]

1 hour ago, Rasbhari said:

I am newbie in this game. But every game with club/association setting, either promotes most active(interactive) member to replace president(14-30 day absence) OR has a co-leader system (with top performers getting it automatically).

 

 

I would be okay with your suggestion if the club owner did not have to purchase the right to form the club. This game is unique by stipulating a koban purchase price for the club, so any solution must take this cost into account, in my opinion.

[SoggyShorts]

+1 to the Chairperson idea, no matter how it's implemented.  All ideas proposed are sound and protect the owner's and contributing members' interests.

Since last activity is already tracked in the game's DB, a lot of (owner-settable) logic could be implemented, and this logic could be mandatory for the founder/owner to set up.  It could solve a lot of problems, including those posed by the OP:

- Auto-boot threshold: Unless the Owner (and/or Chair) intervene by declining, a pop-up warns that "Player Z will be removed for 90/180/365 days of activity."  If the Owner is MIA and no Chair is implemented or assigned, this removes inactives ("cadavers").

- Auto-promote threshold: If the Owner is MIA for 90 or 180 days, again settable by the Owner upon founding, the most active member, as defined by the last 4 weeks' club contributions and perhaps placement in Contests, ToF, girls obtained, but NOT levels gained (since this is very chapter- or spend-dependent) is auto-promoted to Chair.  The owner is permanently fenced from removal because his status in the club listing does not change.  This protects the Owner's interests while giving the club continuity.  Someone who is kicking into the club heavily is unlikely to do things that are inimical to the club, such as mass purges, but the same metrics that caused a promotion could also fence non-Owner boots.  Maxed clubs need the other metrics.  

- If triggered, the auto-promote threshold also triggers reverting the club's status to Open Join, as Pelinor suggested, in the event that the Chair has no interest in actively managing a club.  The Chair has the option to change that, but it goes to Open whenever an Owner or Chair fails to respond to auto-boot messages.  I'm on the fence about whether the Chair assignment is transitive (i.e. whether a Chair can give the position to someone else); my inclination is that it should be.

- Auto-resume: If a formerly MIA owner resurfaces, he can resume control.

Collectively, the Auto-boot, Auto-Promote, and Auto-Resume protocols create a set of guard rails.  The worst case, Owner goes poof and Chair doesn't take on the role, creates a zombie club that auto-removes cadavers: Obvious inactives are auto-removed, active members are safe from the thresholds, new members can join.  If/when new members' activity falls off, they're auto-booted.  If either leader rises from the dead, business resumes as usual.  

 

 

[Pelinor]

Scary thought. What if the club's very existence is tied to a specific user account in such a way that the club is eliminated if the owner's account is deleted? Has this happened in the past?