Organisation Leadership Requests

In-Game and Forum requests and complaints.

Re: Organisation leadership requests

Postby Reddy » Sat May 06, 2017 4:03 pm

Done.
Reddy
 
Posts: 3679
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 7:20 am


Re: Organisation leadership requests

Postby Reddy » Mon May 08, 2017 4:59 am

Reddy
 
Posts: 3679
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 7:20 am

Re: Organisation leadership requests

Postby Sturmgewehr » Thu May 11, 2017 9:15 am

http://classic.particracy.net/vieworgan ... ionid=4342

No active members at the moment, only candidates. But it would be a shame to delete it.
Sturmgewehr
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 10:31 am

Re: Organisation leadership requests

Postby SelucianCrusader » Thu May 11, 2017 8:15 pm

Approved.
Image
Image
User avatar
SelucianCrusader
 
Posts: 1606
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 11:32 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden


Re: Organisation leadership requests

Postby Nina » Sun May 21, 2017 5:20 pm

http://classic.particracy.net/vieworgan ... ionid=4146
There is no full member or leader as my party (http://classic.particracy.net/viewparty ... tyid=24809) is a candidate along with the other 2 parties in it at least one of them should be a leader
Nina
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:07 pm

Re: Organisation leadership requests

Postby SelucianCrusader » Mon May 22, 2017 6:02 am

All approved.
Image
Image
User avatar
SelucianCrusader
 
Posts: 1606
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 11:32 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: Organisation leadership requests

Postby Aquinas » Mon May 22, 2017 11:11 am

Nina wrote:http://classic.particracy.net/vieworganization.php?organizationid=4146
There is no full member or leader as my party (http://classic.particracy.net/viewparty ... tyid=24809) is a candidate along with the other 2 parties in it at least one of them should be a leader


SelucianCrusader wrote:All approved.


Hold on, so Moderation is now promoting candidates of organisations to leadership positions???

This is not permitted within the terms of the Game Rules. To quote them,

12.2 A leaderless organisation is an organisation with no active leaders. When an organisation is leaderless, a party with full member status may receive leadership status by posting a link to both their party and the organisation on the Organisation leadership requests thread. In exceptional circumstances, Moderation reserves the discretion to deny leadership requests.



Organisations with no active full members or leaders are actually eligible for deletion.

For reasons I explained elsewhere, I am concerned about how recent rule changes are likely to considerably increase the already excessive number of organisations. If the rules have now been relaxed even further to allow candidates to become leaders and rescue organisations from deletion, then that's going to be even more of an issue. Trust me, there are certain players who will just apply to join these organisations simply in order to coup them and take over the leadership, so they can amass as many organisational leaderships as they can. Once it becomes more widely known that this is being allowed to happen, this will only become more common.

But even putting that aside...obviously, allowing candidate members to coup organisations risks upsetting the organisation's founders, especially if the leadership applicants were specifically not promoted to full membership for the very reason it was felt they wanted (ICly and/or OOCly) to undermine the organisation's core purpose.

If you really do now have a policy of promoting candidate members of organisations to leadership positions upon request, then could I at least suggest introducing a waiting period - even if it was just 4 days or something? That would at least give the organisation's legitimate members a chance to return and sort things out, before their organisation gets couped by an outsider who was never invited in in the first place.
Aquinas
 
Posts: 8575
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:28 am
Location: UK

Re: Organisation leadership requests

Postby SelucianCrusader » Mon May 22, 2017 4:59 pm

Thank you for your feedback. Actually, doing that is within the scope of the Game Rules, as Moderation always reserves the discretion to make exceptions in special circumstances. However, you can be sure that had this concerned another bigger and more influential organization, such as the IML, Moderation would have invested more time in finding a successor than for organizations with just a few members. Just to make that clear - from a Moderator's perspective, there are no "legitimate" or "uninvited" members of a party organization. We generally do not intervene if there seems to be no problem.

Moderation will strive encourage players who wish to contribute and participate in RP with organizations, not pose a hindrance to them - especially when there seems to be no problem. Removing party organizations because of a lack of active or full members has been a source of conflict preciously and discouraged both new and established players, with little or nothing gained. If someone is frustrated about a multitude of organizations with only a handful of players because that is frustrating somehow.. then, I'm truly sorry - but that is not going to be our top priority. Luckily there's a hard-coded limit to those as well as one party may only found one party organization and no more. The founder of an organization is always in a leadership position and always reserves the right to remove other leaders - this is hard-coded into the game as I'm sure you're aware of.

As for a potential 4-day waiting period, it's an interesting idea that we will discuss. Thanks.
Image
Image
User avatar
SelucianCrusader
 
Posts: 1606
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 11:32 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

PreviousNext

Return to Game Moderation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: cm9777 and 1 guest