Драко
Auto-translated
To systematize what has been said:
1."Some earn their positions not just through some discussions, but through posts in the tournament", "A good example is Perpolken, I see he doesn't write very much..." - these are objections regarding the number of messages. From this comes the question - why would a person who is a good/excellent tournament player need a clan? Is this person (not referring to Perpolken personally) interested in clans at all? I doubt it... The game takes up quite a bit of time and effort, and imagine if they also had to engage in administrative activities...
However, the question of the number of messages is not fundamental.
2.I agree on the registration period: two months is too many. "If the registration period is increased, for example, to one month from the date of foundation (introduce the concept of an unregistered clan), then we can fully see how a clan will behave during the month and the activity of its members can be seen. After a month of existence, a clan can become Registered if it doesn't fall apart." - I agree with SoulDrinker
3.Regarding granting the leader's powers to the deputy (as I understand it, this refers to moderation), I also agree.
4.The issue of warnings is controversial.
"Next, clan warnings—what is this nonsense? After all, each member carries their own cross for their own words, and clan warnings are overkill; few people there will correct anything, clans here are already barely hanging on. In principle, this point should be crossed out to avoid problems in the future (because smart-asses will be found)."
"Regarding 10 warnings. Are you serious? Meaning someone will spam the forum with impunity, and the rest will stand and gratefully absorb it? 3 warnings are just right. They should simply have an 'expiration date' equal to the disqualification period (7 months, for example)."
The conclusion is: we need to precisely determine what warnings are given for. It cannot be the activities of clan members, since they have their own warnings. It turns out they are given for the activities of the clan. But what clan activity can be recognized as harmful to the forum? Give an example. I am struggling, because there have been no such cases.
Furthermore, once we decide what warnings are given for — and this is a fundamental question (punishment cannot exist without a crime) — we can decide on the number. Two options:
- 10 warnings - an analogy with a user (and here warnings are counted regardless of who gave them or for what violation, i.e., if I, for example, cursed in the chat and 10 people gave me warnings - ban, regardless of it being one violation).
- 3 warnings - each warning is valid for 7 months (I wonder why 7?). If a clan commits a violation within 7 months, the previous warning is declared "non-removable", and the new one lasts for 7 months, and so on. If a clan does not commit a violation, the warning is removed after the term expires (7 months). I suggest 6 months instead. And, I hope, Qwerty, is this what you meant by "expiration date"?
5."In my opinion, the minimum number of people in a clan is 4. So: If fewer than 4 clan members appear on the forum within 2-3 months without stating the reasons - the clan is disbanded." I agree. Very reasonable.
6."Regarding league overseers. HM guys, the issue of the league has not been resolved yet! You are imposing your opinion again. I think the league should decide issues related to the clans that have joined it. And new clans should be under the guardianship of the Mods. If a clan does not comply with the rules, the mod will write that something or other is not done correctly and that's it, no question, but what you proposed is, to put it mildly, going too far."
"I think the issue of registration should be considered by coordinators, not the LZMS..."
Before writing this, it wouldn't hurt to check which clans the moderators and administrators belong to... Let's check:
- Pandora - Из многих единое;
- Lu41k - Order of the Phoenix;
- Night - Из многих единое;
- Ley - Order of the Phoenix;
- Qwerty - Order of the Phoenix;
- Kamikaze - Из многих единое;
- Alex Ghost - Человек человеку;
- Hedgehog in the Fog - no clan;
- Inquisitor - Haven;
- Magnus - no clan;
- Supreme - Dark Templars;
- LotR - Storm team;
- Predvestnik - Человек человеку;
- Alex_soldier - no clan;
- Nowizard - Из многих единое;
- Necronix - Storm team;
- Adelaide - Человек человеку;
- Xaker - Soul Catchers;
- VDV_forever - Order of the Phoenix.
Impressive, isn't it. I trust these people at least because they are primarily moderators and administrators (I believe that the work is more important to them), and then members of clans; I believe that the good of the forum is more important to them than local (clan) benefits. Do you trust them?
From here comes the "edge" question (oh, how I don't want to ask it...): who do you trust with control: the moderators and administrators, whose decision you will likely be unable to appeal, or the LZMS, where you will be on equal footing with these moderators, and whose decision you can appeal?... I am asking this question to myself as well :)\br>
Qwerty, I'm not pretending, I really don't know. This is partially my fault. But... where is the promotion of the LZMS brand? Why isn't it written in the most visible place that such-and-such a tournament is organized with the participation of LZMS?
"The League of Laws-Interclan Council is not a Factory of Tournaments
In my opinion, the organization of tournaments is not part of the league's goals..." - strange, it seems to me the opposite, that is exactly what the league should do, but only for clans.
1."Some earn their positions not just through some discussions, but through posts in the tournament", "A good example is Perpolken, I see he doesn't write very much..." - these are objections regarding the number of messages. From this comes the question - why would a person who is a good/excellent tournament player need a clan? Is this person (not referring to Perpolken personally) interested in clans at all? I doubt it... The game takes up quite a bit of time and effort, and imagine if they also had to engage in administrative activities...
However, the question of the number of messages is not fundamental.
2.I agree on the registration period: two months is too many. "If the registration period is increased, for example, to one month from the date of foundation (introduce the concept of an unregistered clan), then we can fully see how a clan will behave during the month and the activity of its members can be seen. After a month of existence, a clan can become Registered if it doesn't fall apart." - I agree with SoulDrinker
3.Regarding granting the leader's powers to the deputy (as I understand it, this refers to moderation), I also agree.
4.The issue of warnings is controversial.
"Next, clan warnings—what is this nonsense? After all, each member carries their own cross for their own words, and clan warnings are overkill; few people there will correct anything, clans here are already barely hanging on. In principle, this point should be crossed out to avoid problems in the future (because smart-asses will be found)."
"Regarding 10 warnings. Are you serious? Meaning someone will spam the forum with impunity, and the rest will stand and gratefully absorb it? 3 warnings are just right. They should simply have an 'expiration date' equal to the disqualification period (7 months, for example)."
The conclusion is: we need to precisely determine what warnings are given for. It cannot be the activities of clan members, since they have their own warnings. It turns out they are given for the activities of the clan. But what clan activity can be recognized as harmful to the forum? Give an example. I am struggling, because there have been no such cases.
Furthermore, once we decide what warnings are given for — and this is a fundamental question (punishment cannot exist without a crime) — we can decide on the number. Two options:
- 10 warnings - an analogy with a user (and here warnings are counted regardless of who gave them or for what violation, i.e., if I, for example, cursed in the chat and 10 people gave me warnings - ban, regardless of it being one violation).
- 3 warnings - each warning is valid for 7 months (I wonder why 7?). If a clan commits a violation within 7 months, the previous warning is declared "non-removable", and the new one lasts for 7 months, and so on. If a clan does not commit a violation, the warning is removed after the term expires (7 months). I suggest 6 months instead. And, I hope, Qwerty, is this what you meant by "expiration date"?
5."In my opinion, the minimum number of people in a clan is 4. So: If fewer than 4 clan members appear on the forum within 2-3 months without stating the reasons - the clan is disbanded." I agree. Very reasonable.
6."Regarding league overseers. HM guys, the issue of the league has not been resolved yet! You are imposing your opinion again. I think the league should decide issues related to the clans that have joined it. And new clans should be under the guardianship of the Mods. If a clan does not comply with the rules, the mod will write that something or other is not done correctly and that's it, no question, but what you proposed is, to put it mildly, going too far."
"I think the issue of registration should be considered by coordinators, not the LZMS..."
Before writing this, it wouldn't hurt to check which clans the moderators and administrators belong to... Let's check:
- Pandora - Из многих единое;
- Lu41k - Order of the Phoenix;
- Night - Из многих единое;
- Ley - Order of the Phoenix;
- Qwerty - Order of the Phoenix;
- Kamikaze - Из многих единое;
- Alex Ghost - Человек человеку;
- Hedgehog in the Fog - no clan;
- Inquisitor - Haven;
- Magnus - no clan;
- Supreme - Dark Templars;
- LotR - Storm team;
- Predvestnik - Человек человеку;
- Alex_soldier - no clan;
- Nowizard - Из многих единое;
- Necronix - Storm team;
- Adelaide - Человек человеку;
- Xaker - Soul Catchers;
- VDV_forever - Order of the Phoenix.
Impressive, isn't it. I trust these people at least because they are primarily moderators and administrators (I believe that the work is more important to them), and then members of clans; I believe that the good of the forum is more important to them than local (clan) benefits. Do you trust them?
From here comes the "edge" question (oh, how I don't want to ask it...): who do you trust with control: the moderators and administrators, whose decision you will likely be unable to appeal, or the LZMS, where you will be on equal footing with these moderators, and whose decision you can appeal?... I am asking this question to myself as well :)\br>
Qwerty, I'm not pretending, I really don't know. This is partially my fault. But... where is the promotion of the LZMS brand? Why isn't it written in the most visible place that such-and-such a tournament is organized with the participation of LZMS?
"The League of Laws-Interclan Council is not a Factory of Tournaments
In my opinion, the organization of tournaments is not part of the league's goals..." - strange, it seems to me the opposite, that is exactly what the league should do, but only for clans.
