I mean the only reason I don't really approve of this idea is considering that the fact that Recruits aren't really in the clan, they are like on a trial basis to get in the clan. We control the votes, you don't like them, vote no and if the majority of us don't like said person, then we'll vote no and they won't get in. It's not much of a difference then not allowing them to join as a recruit.

How about an idea about if a recruit gets banned during their recruitment process their recruitment gets terminated?

*DEAD* EgN|s BEST ADMIN TITTYSPRINKLES: i thought today was rulebreaking day my bad :-(
*DEAD* EgN| Terminator #Fishy Guy: yup, ma dick to long :)

See no point in making things more of a difficult process. I also have a feeling certain people won't put down a proper response but instead a dig at a person.

2018 Goals for EgN
******
***** *******
*** ********************

Think of it this way;

So you’ve posted this idea for members of the clan to see. Why? Well your only motive would be that there’s people who have gotten into the clan that you don’t think should be here, yes? If your motive if different then your idea makes little to no logical sense because the system would otherwise be fine. So provided that what I stated is your motive, you’ve made this known to apparent toxic members asking them to change letting in toxic members. Seems a little counter intuitive? Just a thought.

Another thing I point out is your explicit term usage of “influencing the vote,” which is something we’ve beeen trying to prevent. We don’t want you to discuss your votes because your vote is your own. Now you would post on an app explicitly trying to get people to vote one way or another. It’s easy to post in a constructive manner how negative the terrible circumstance of the recruits ban was before he got accepted so people don’t vote for him. But in reality the ban was years ago and the recruit is actually a good guy. Do Staff deny a comment like that? “Nah we hadn’t seen him like this so we deny it” but really it’s a fabricated truth but truth nonetheless, so is denying it right? No we’d probably need to accept it. Pretty easy to rack in those no votes towards an otherwise cool guy, or even the other way around, yes for a really toxic guy.

See my point? I disagree with this idea but I don’t neccessarily disagree that the system could be changed. I just don’t think this is the best way to do it. You could counter argue that my example against it could be said for admin apps, but really, no, because only Staff look at those and not a whole community voting.

@ Central; we already evaluate recruits if they get banned during recruitment and usually deny them.

I still think you guys are missing the point. People who simply want to bash a recruit their comments wouldn't even be allowed. And to the people saying just vote no well what about our members who are never active but yet only get on to vote yes on all recruits or vote no. What if the comments were only visible the day the voting booth was opened? Would that solve some of the influencing you all think would happen? Is that even a solution? I'm just throwing out ideas. Thanks to everyone who's commented so far

I have an idea. Only allow Elite and Veterans or just Veterans to comment constructively on Recruit applications. Members can still vote, but it leaves a little room for people to say "Ok, a vetted community member has input on this particular recruit."

That make sense?

I thought of that as well

dumb idea, members are the most active group of players there are. you will often see 5 members online for every 1 veteran. The group that has the most contact with recruits is always the newish members

I disagree however if this did happen my vote would be Elite/Vet+. Wait a second, we gave a board for these things seems like everyone has forgotten Oops ?.

2018 Goals for EgN
******
***** *******
*** ********************