In the fc/pm I get a lot of people telling me this problem and asking for advice.
What is the best thing to tell them? I am doubting every time they ask it, I know people are working on it, but should I just suggest them to wait for futurous updates?
ok here is my thoughts, draconic asylum is mainly run by me. The owner isnt inactive but only sits in lobby and only on the weekends. So I basically run draconic asylum. Since I know for some clans its an issue having an inactive owner even at the level that draconic asylum does, Im able to successfully run draconic asylum. I basically take the new stuff coming up or has come out to the owner when he is on and he says ok goes in gives me and whatever rank I want to have that as a permission and then logs off again. Yes I have asked him to step down as owner but he refuses. even with the removal of inactive owners it would mean nothing to draconic asylum since the owner still logs into the game and sits in lobby.
As I suggested before to deal with this:
1. no active owner even in lobby for 3 to 6 months
2. designate the most active co-owner to owner via time logged in to the game
3. give more support to co-owners besides 2 kicks a day (yes I have had to ask admins to do a kick for me when a idiot guest comes into the clan chat) to be sufficient I would give the co-owners at minimum 5 kicks a day instead of the 2 that is already.
3. give more support to co-owners besides 2 kicks a day (yes I have had to ask admins to do a kick for me when a idiot guest comes into the clan chat) to be sufficient I would give the co-owners at minimum 5 kicks a day instead of the 2 that is already.
Kick limitations isnt for guests
`*•.¸(*•.¸(`*•.¸+¸.•*´)¸.•*)¸.•*´
+«´¨`•°
SKILL SCHOOL
•´¨`»+
. .•*(¸.•*´(¸.•*´+`*•.¸)`*•.¸)*•.
11-Dec-2013 22:09:03
- Last edited on
11-Dec-2013 22:09:23
by
Scret
Pescao6
said
:
1. I don\'t support removing Owners.
But it seems you do via forcing the clan to reform en masse into a new clan and sacrifice their history, name, stats, and all the progress... If you reform without the owner, you're removing the owner in a roundabout way. This system is doing it directly to spare everyone the needless hassle that was introduced with the official clan system as this was never an issue before this.
Or is it really okay for all those bonds made in that clan to be severed simply because 1 person decided to go inactive and everyone is scattered now because of it?
@I am TranceYea, that's the official statement, Jagex acknowledges it's an issue and will look into it.
I have no guarantee at that. In fact, odds are it wouldn't. But should that happen, it's easy for the new leader to transfer it to another person who is capable. Keeping the leader in place and giving to other ranks still prevents people from making other dep owners, so you can't transfer leadership power in that system.
I'm not sure why you would want to inflict another system which was flawed on clans which could just result in more drama for a clan to replace a system which you say is flawed and doesn't exactly cause any drama.
It may not cause drama to you, but it does to the clans who suffer under it. The severity of the drama is proportional to the severity of the damage done by the inactive leader. And I'm not sure how this would have more drama let alone the same amount as right now.
Any situation involving keeping the owner and lowing the permissions would have more drama than anything replacing the leader would it seems to me.
No one individual's experience is the same as any other and I feel attempting to assume everyone's experience is the same as one's own is a very dangerous path when it comes to such things.
I can assure you though, from a CM and Clan Support point of view, that the current system causes significant drama and creates substantial issues for those clans atrapped in this way. If it did not we would not have started this thread in the 1st place - neither Mod Maz or I feel the need to create work for ourselves