Needy wrote:
Central wrote:
Lyriati wrote:
Cooper wrote:
(which I think would piss just as many people off if they have to wear tags to be member again)
100% this
Well I mean it would but of all 12-17 days? That's sure not as long as you would be lets say Elite+ because all you have to do, is pass the Recruit stage, become a member and stick to member and not wear tags. I've come across people not wanting to join this community because Recruits have to wear tags for you to pass the stage however its of all just longer than a week, which is not long at all. Could you explain to me, because I'm just curious to why you think that it would piss people off jist to wear a Tag for a week to never have to?
Believe it's just the fact that it sorta defeats the purpose of having the option to either wear or not wear tags which is why I suggest that applying as a member shouldn't go through recruitment process neither be confined to the clan
Mr. Simplistic wrote:
I would even like to allow the member rank to double clan but thats just an idea.
For it, technically if it were to be a member
(or however we would name it) wouldn't be a clan member to which allows to double clan
Just to quote from the other thread,
(realised it would of been more apt here) viewtopic.php?f=13&t=32799&start=170Needy wrote:
Before this thread closes and / or has no further replies, thought I'd add this with respect to the retired rank. While I am
not convinced that the retired rank
(to put it in simpler terms, members who remove themselves from the clan) should be given additional forum access, or any added access in that case, apart from a regular forum member as the when you become a member of the CLAN you're
(should be) given additional permissions and / or privileges that simply put, make
you (them) want to become a member of the clan. Allowing for the same, or similar access, when a member LEAVES reverses that process.
While I am NOT making a reference to the
"retired has access to chat box", and etc, this is more of a general statement that
ideally there should be a difference between someone who is a member of the clan, to someone who left the clan.
And it's fairly under debate to say otherwise
if you want an increase in the member count.
Which then brings me to the purpose of the
member rank. Always had this in the back of my head when the member rank was created but never found an appropriate time to mention it. But from the time the new ranking system was introduced
with the intent that member didn't have to wear tags, so we could perhaps increase our amount of members to those who weren't necessarily for wearing the EgN| tag yet wanted to be remain part of the community / clan. Which is where I find the MERMBER rank to be more of a
community rank, rather than a clan rank. Does that make sense? That is, there should be a modest separation between the community and the clan
without driving away community members.
To put it into simpler, and more general, terms
Community MembersRegistered user > someone who registers to the forums, a guest of EGN
Member rank / community member > same expectations as a clan member yet they aren't apart of the clan. No tag requirement.
a.) different / simplified application process(?) possibly an immediate acceptance after they chat with a Staff+
- no need to go through recruit considering they already have no attachments to the clan
- partially resolves the "wears tags as a recruit while doesn't need to wear tags as a member"
b.) have full access to the website as equal to an Elite member of the clan
- i.e would include open chat box, and LOA access (maybe an addition to the new website could be two seperate chatboxes, first being a community chat box and secondly, a clan chatbox, consideration)
c.) cannot become an admin, neither join teams as they are now
Members already don't have a wide set of privileges when they become a member of the clan, which has practically made them as equal to the retired rank except they can post on LOA's, and are well, considered a clan member
Clan MembersRecruit rank > an application process to become a MEMBER of the CLAN beginning at the rank of Elite which requires a tag agreement
a.) make an application wearing the EgN-R| tag until accepted / denied
- pls just bring back the voting booth. Was one of the few ways members directly got to know the recruits. Now Staff+ make the FULL decision with members making slight comments on the side
b.) once accepted, goes to Elite and must continue to wear tags.
- now considered a member of the clan
- can join teams and / or become an admin
- continue to climb ranks
Elite+ ranks > needs no explanation, as written
(still suggest something between Elder and Legend, large gap between the two ranks, little to nothing to work from)Strictly speaking ranks, and not users of each rank, this is why I was FOR to remove the retired rank. Less of those a part of the rank. And more of how the current rank system should be readjusted.
Does this makes sense to most? Was quickly written, that is to say this isn't perfectly well adjusted, but rather a general basis of what I mean by the rank(s) which surround the retired rank and member rank.
But it may be a decent medium, between the two concerns about the retired rank and member rank that is, especially considering the way the member rank was created practically made it a community rank
>no tags neither able to climb the ranks
>not able to join teams
>cannot become an admin
Knowledge Base wrote:
Member:
- Represent EgN in a positive manner at all times.
- Provide feedback on new recruits
- Have the same forum, Teamspeak, and server name
- Eligible to be promoted to elite by wearing the clan tags (EgN| ) after 4 weeks.
Member: Those that have been accepted into the clan, basic members of EgN. They are unable to become admin or join teams. They are not required to wear clan tags, but can wear them to be promoted to Elite.
The only thing different between the member rank and the retired rank is that they can post on LOA's and they can provide feedback to recruits which no one does with the current process of voting on recruits.
I think a good answer to this would be to make an “Associate” rank like discussed at the meeting and make the ranking structure how it used to be (keeping at least Legend if not also Elder). Associate (just using this as a name for lack of better of) would be a mix between current member and retired.
Example perms:
- Post on LoAs and maybe some of the sections current members can access (I’m not very educated on what sections can only be seen by members+ or whatever)
- Shoutbox access
- No tags
- Double clanning allowed
- MAYBE let them vote on rep’s (if that idea isn’t getting scrapped)
- Reapply and go straight to member after Staff+ interview?
- Not sure what else feel free to add
What they can’t do:
- Vote on recruits
- Join teams
- Become admin
- Aren’t immune to getting banned by admins
- Feel free to add.
I think this would be a good way to keep people incorporated in the “community” in one way or another while not participating in the “clan aspects” of EgN. Not in the “clan”, but in the “community” (which I personally consider Retired, regulars, and to an extent members already). They are still participants, just not to the same extent or manner as say a member+.
Now all this being said there are a few more things to cover.
1. Retired should be reworked to Registered User just with a unique User Group. When making an LoA they could chose to demote to Associate instead of member, and get the perks above. By retiring however, they would be “disassociating” with the community and fully cutting all ties (chosing to revoke all the privellages that come with being a member). Simply said Associate would be for people who still want to participate or “associate” with the community, whereas retired would be for people deciding to completely leave.
2. Another question that comes up is who gets the rank? Well like I said above, at least in my opinion, people who are leaving should have the choice to get the rank. On top of that, people who decide to full on retire should be made well aware by a Staff+ what they are chosing to do and what they are losing when they leave (ex. saying “Are you sure you want to retire instead of becoming Associate? If so you will lose [insert list of permissions].”)
Obviously there needs to be a way for current retired to get the rank (specifically those who want these permissions) and I’m not sure how this would work, maybe let them apply for it? I’m completely against going in and giving all retireds Associate myself, for various reasons, such as banned/removed individuals and inactives that shouldn’t have the rank.
I also think there should be a way to maybe apply for the rank without going through the recruitment process and wearing tags, apparently it’s a big thing that people want to be involved but really don’t want to wear tags. I know GP had/has a lot of people considering joining who are very active but are extremely turned off by tags. This could be a way to get more people potentially involved, I’m just not sure how it would work.
3. What happens to banned / removed people? Obviously not associate like I just said. Maybe for double clanning scenarios offer stepping down to Associate but other than that no. I think if retired has no perms it may be okay to make them just become retired. They were once apart of the community but now have no ties. When they are banned/removed Staff+ are “retiring” their member status like brands decide to “retire” certain items.
4. Like I said make people well aware of what they are losing when the fully retire/leave, that way there can’t be any complaining about not having certain perms. It is their decision to retire and they consent to losing their perms when they would do so.
5. A very touchy area that I’m cautious of mentioning is regarding people who aren’t allowed to reapply but aren’t banned. I’m not sure how this should be handled but Staff+ should make a clear decision whether or not to let these people be Associate.
These are just some ideas and a lot of them could be fleshed out a lot more (particularly how do you get the rank and who gets it) so please give some feedback and suggestions. What do you guys think and do you think this is a good way to handle the current situation? From what was said at the meeting whenever the new site comes around the ranking structure will probably see some changes so until then the best we can do is give input.
Tricky
