SEARCH The Web  GameSpy   GameSpy Forums  

GameSpy Forums » Legacy GameSpy Forums » [GSF] Clan Business Proposed adjustments to GSF membership
1   2   3   4   5  
Author Topic: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership
Cyrris  9061 posts
28813_1056129-icon
Woei!
Posts: 9,061
Join Date: Mar '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/28/05 6:06pm
In Reply To #46

No, what I'm saying is perhaps the requirements need to be relaxed slightly so that you can encompass certain key members. You know, shape the policies based on what is generally in the clan's better interests. It doesn't make sense to be strict and lose when you can be a little more lax and win.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
Haaaardflip  8197 posts
10570_510997-icon
Internet Professional
Posts: 8,197
Join Date: Dec '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/28/05 6:10pm
In Reply To #47

They may be in the better interests of the clan, but if I'm not mistaken, it would make the clan unequal. Is it right that, for example, PARENA could possibly not post again to 2007 on GSF, yet remain part of [GSF]? If he's voting on people to get into the clan, he should be reading what they've done on GSF, and I see no reason why he can't contribute at the same time he's reviewing members that are coming in.

Just trying to keep everyone in the clan equal, if we're not to have a leadership of any form.

 

-----signature-----
The Earth is made of Chemistry
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
Pineapple_Vendor  1159 posts
5027_hat
0\/\/n3d by Tetsuo!
Posts: 1,159
Join Date: May '02
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/28/05 6:11pm
++ I'm all for a revote, if for nothing else than to reassert membership. If the majority of the clan feels someone doesn't belong, then he/she is out. It'll also help to weed out inactives and invaluables, naturally. I'm putting my head on the chopping block by saying this, but so is everyone else.

++ I'm all for the proposed game server that's being discussed in IRC at the moment, though that isn't the big issue right now.

++ I'm all for the changing of initiation. I like the idea of "sponsorship", otherwise known as invitation. That allows the clan to pick and choose possible members, rather than any random forumer coming and applying.

++ I'm all for changing the way activity is measured. I think posting on GSF should be required. We are a foruming clan at heart, and IRC'ers, BTF'ers, and GSF:CF'ers aren't taking an active part in here. I have nothing to offer up on it, but I think it's a good idea. Perhaps what was mentioned before - a count on voting activity? That seems fair enough.

All in all, I'm glad to see some (possible) change going on.

 

-----signature-----
WWWWWWWWWWWWMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMWWWWWWWWWWWW
DDDDDDDDDDDD000000000000
000000000000DDDDDDDDDDDD
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
Cyrris  9061 posts
28813_1056129-icon
Woei!
Posts: 9,061
Join Date: Mar '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/28/05 6:18pm
In Reply To #48

No, that's not it, I'm not saying you should always exempt PARENA (or anyone). I'm saying that for this round of policy-making, the rules should be based on whatever suits the clan best. If PARENA posts 15 times a month, then make that the minimum for active membership. If PAR goes under that later, then it's just like if any other member did - bad. But at least initially, the policy should be based on whatever minimum suits you best, while not being unreasonable.

If you know you can keep more members (who, lets face it, rock) just by adjusting some proposed policies by a little bit, why not?

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
Haaaardflip  8197 posts
10570_510997-icon
Internet Professional
Posts: 8,197
Join Date: Dec '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/28/05 6:36pm
In Reply To #50

If I were to go by that idea, the policy for being active would have to be '2 posts in the last year'. Fine, if you guys want PARENA to be in, he's in. I agree it's very beneficial, and he's great for the clan, but I just view it as extremely unequal and unfair on the rest of the people we're booting out, such as nothing, who did post quite a lot last year.

 

-----signature-----
The Earth is made of Chemistry
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
[GSF][P]aradox  8180 posts
5417_hat
Covert Agent
Posts: 8,180
Join Date: Feb '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/28/05 6:42pm
In Reply To #45
Cyrris posted:

I think it should be a goal - to have [GSF] as enjoyable and running fine while retaining it's system of complete equality.</quote>

<quote by="Cyrris">
No, what I'm saying is perhaps the requirements need to be relaxed slightly so that you can encompass certain key members.


One of these statements is not like the other, one of these statements doesn't beloooong.

PARENA can start posting now on GSF. He'll be active and therefore exempt. But if he doesn't, him coding the site and hosting it is not justification to retain him. I would like to keep PARENA in the clan, and not just for what he has done and can do for us, but the simple fact is that if he doesn't participate in the forum, he shouldn't be in the forum clan.

In any case, nobody is exempt. Either we don't kick out the inactive people, or we kick them all out.

 

-----signature-----
[P]aradox
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
Cyrris  9061 posts
28813_1056129-icon
Woei!
Posts: 9,061
Join Date: Mar '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/28/05 7:05pm
In Reply To #52

You're right - the first quote makes no sense.

It can't run smoothly while treating everyone as completely equal, because it could be either all equal without a good website (and thus not running smoothly), or unequal with a good website. Unless he posted more.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
Dracion  31352 posts
6905_1396209-icon
I am the One.
Posts: 31,352
Join Date: Apr '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/28/05 8:16pm
In Reply To #48
Hardflip posted:

In Reply To #47

They may be in the better interests of the clan, but if I'm not mistaken, it would make the clan unequal. Is it right that, for example, PARENA could possibly not post again to 2007 on GSF, yet remain part of [GSF]? If he's voting on people to get into the clan, he should be reading what they've done on GSF, and I see no reason why he can't contribute at the same time he's reviewing members that are coming in.

Just trying to keep everyone in the clan equal, if we're not to have a leadership of any form.


I think this is where the leadership thing would help.

Parena could be included in a 'council' staff thingy (sorrry brain not working right), where certain key (as CtL) have the 'rules' relaxed a bit for them.

He's active here, he fixes the site, etc.

Here's where you have you core members, that while they might not post as much as some of us, they do the other stuff we don't want to, or can't do.

 

-----signature-----
The Turtle Moves...
Moon Base to Ground Control
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
CoyoteExile  2755 posts
5027_hat
Board Guest
Posts: 2,755
Join Date: Feb '02
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/28/05 9:12pm
I have a quick question:

Why are people concerned with booting the inactives before doing a revote? It's not like 40 inactives will suddenly appear and no vote everyone they don't know. These people are gone and not likely to return. Either that or they're so indifferent that they won't even know there was a revote until months after the fact. It would be much simpler to bump the percentage, do a complete revote and set a system in place that will make sure we don't get clogged with inactive people again.

A simple way would be to decide how long a time is too long and after that amount of time out they go. If a member announces a period of inactivity then they would be protected from this for that amount of time. After that time is up the protection goes away and they get booted after the preset time elapses.

Head hurts quite a bit so more later or tomorrow perhaps.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
[GSF][P]aradox  8180 posts
5417_hat
Covert Agent
Posts: 8,180
Join Date: Feb '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/28/05 9:30pm
In Reply To #55

Then we should have the revote ASAP. Next week sounds good.

 

-----signature-----
[P]aradox
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
tacoprophet  1879 posts
5027_hat
Guest
Posts: 1,879
Join Date: Mar '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/28/05 11:16pm
In Reply To #55

My thinking was that the proposed revote would occur under the new conditions... for the sake of argument, let's say 75% approval, and no neutral votes. If that's the case, and inactives are not culled prior to the vote, the clan could easily go to zero members. It may, in fact, be unavoidable under those conditions.

 

-----signature-----
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I beat the internet; the end guy's hard.
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
Haaaardflip  8197 posts
10570_510997-icon
Internet Professional
Posts: 8,197
Join Date: Dec '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/29/05 7:53am
In Reply To #55

What Taco said, plus, some inactives do go to IRC and talk to other [GSF] people, meaning they could make a difference by voting, even when they've been labelled 'inactive'; not really part of the clan.

 

-----signature-----
The Earth is made of Chemistry
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
Terraxos  1664 posts
5027_hat
Guest
Posts: 1,664
Join Date: Oct '02
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/29/05 10:56am
In Reply To #57:

In that case, maybe a lower level of approval - the current 67%, for example - would be necessary for the revote, even if we are changing the voting system. Or we could keep it at 75% and allow neutral votes. I'm all for changing the voting system in the ways suggested, but if we put those restrictions on the revote, then what you describe may happen - i.e., no one reaches 75% approval, because a bunch of old inactive members don't vote and their votes are counted as - automatically. After all, if one-third of the clan is inactive, then 75% approval will require getting + votes from all the active members plus quite a few inactive members as well.

The other solution would be to make the default vote for everyone +, so the inactive members would vote + for everyone rather than - for everyone. That's hardly a perfect solution either, but we need to find some way of ensuring that at least some members remain in the clan.

As for PARENA: I stand by my earlier statement. I think he's a necessary part of the clan, because of his immense usefulness in hosting and running the website. I maintain that he either needs a special exception, or the inactivity rules should be changed to allow him to remain. Simply saying 'he must post more or leave' is hardly an adequate solution.

ADDED: Here's a thought. What about if posting on this, the [GSF] clan forums, could be counted towards the number of posts needed to remain active? OK, I know we've had this discussion before, and I know we're the GameSpy Forums Clan and not the GameSpy Forums Clan Forum Clan. But that's one possible way of allowing PARENA to remain - I know he still posts here from time to time.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
Haaaardflip  8197 posts
10570_510997-icon
Internet Professional
Posts: 8,197
Join Date: Dec '01
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/29/05 11:25am
In Reply To #59

The problem is, is that this forum is more detached from the community it's based on more than ever. If we were still on /gamespy PARENA's posts would count. But the majority of the /gamespy community never come here, and thus I'm not sure whether or not posting here counts towards contributing to the community (rather than a select few).

[added Jan 29 2005 12:31PM]

Oh, and also:
Terraxos posted:

I think he's a necessary part of the clan, because of his immense usefulness in hosting and running the website.

[GSF] has more than one person who can code, or host a website, you know. It happens to have friends who would even host if they were not in [GSF]. No member of [GSF] is a 'key member' of any sorts.

 

-----signature-----
The Earth is made of Chemistry
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
parena  1051 posts
Flood Spore
Posts: 1,051
Join Date: May '02
RE: Proposed adjustments to GSF membership 1/29/05 6:22pm
<orange>WARNING! Looong read coming where I'm trying to make sense! (edit: on clicking the Preview button, I get "Your post is too large to preview." grin )

I'm having a hard time with this one. Treating everyone completely as equals would be great. Constitutions from around the globe contain this (though aren't lived by, there's always 'elite'). Also, most people seem to agree that /gamespy is the important forum, where it all happens. I'll be honest, for me it all happens out here, in /gsf. I rarely ever visit the /gamespy forums. Sometimes I go and check it out a bit, but never really post (hence the 2 posts in 2004). Looking at those issues, it'd be a clear call: I'm gonna be out if we'd apply /gamespy activity rules.

But then the gsf.parena.net issue arrises. Why do I host it? After DarkFlow quit, there had to be someone else. I was happy to do it. Being an active member on /gamespy back then (posting, gaming and then hosting) it made perfect sense. GSF was a fun group of freaks, coding is my work and hobby. New design by CTL (shut up Cyrris), new code and database design by me. Still made perfect sense. Our 'home' got moved from /gamespy to /gsf and discussion broke loose. People claiming they'd never visit /gamespy or /gsf 'coz what's the use of having 2 forums, etcetera, etcetera. For me it meant I stopped visiting /gamespy as often as I used to because /gsf was the place that had the people I knew. Enough threads around in our Pub and Clan Business forums to keep me busy and a very occasional post in The Gallery is good enough for me. I can't really find the time to also follow the threads in /gamespy forums, I think there's too much happening out there to make any useful contribution, apart from the few posts a year.

"Active member" is not easy to define. Am I an active member? Well, I post here regularly and I host and maintain the clan website. That'd qualify me as active. But for many of you out there, active means "active at the /gamespy forums, where the clan originates from and is named after." Clearly, 2 posts in 2004 would deem me almost KIA. But posting at /gamespy would mean I wouldn't be posting at /gsf anymore really. According the the new rules that'd be fine, but for me personally, it wouldn't. I like /gsf, I know it and it's people better than at /gamespy. Call me lazy if you will, but that's how it is.

Do I want to stay a member of GSF? Of course! I want to see a complete redesign of the clan site (just because it's fun, not because it's not good), including rewriting all the code and converting all data to a new database design. Yeah, that'd take a lot of time as well, but it'd be in my "coding hobby" time, not in my "forum reading and posting" time.

Would I host and maintain the site if I was no longer a member? Honestly, I don't know. Why would I want to do that when the community I'm doing this for created new rules that 'kicked' me out? Hardflip probably has a point in saying there are other people outside of GSF who'd want to host/maintain the website. If I hadn't been part of GSF, I might be willing to do the same. But it's a bit different, now that I've been part of GSF for about 2.5 years now. Another question would be would you even want people outside the clan doing your website business?

My bottom line on new rules:
- 'Required' number of posts for initiates on /gamespy
- 'Required' posting activity for members on /gamespy and /gsf (not a minimum post count per month or something, but a non-posting period would define a warning/kick).
- Bump initiates approval to 75%
- No more negatives. I'm not sure about 'default' votes (either + or -) yet. If we'd decide on needing approval from 75% of the clan, default would be -. But you could also decide on needing 75% + from the total amount of votes (and then default to - won't work).
- 'Kick' the "hasn't posted for the past 6 finished initiates" members. Currently at 44, without filtering new members. That'd get rid of ~50%. Most likely some of them will now start voting for who's left, and we'll get to ~35% by the time the next initiate voting is over, since some of them now got worried. Plus other warning (one MUST have warnings)/kicking rules (no posts at all on /gamespy and /gsf for a certain period)
- No revote; the kicking inactives step (if you don't vote then you're not a member) will take care of it and so will the 'you must post every now and then' rule
- Sponsoring of an initiate required. Perhaps 3 members or so. And sponsoring is limited to 1 initiate for x time.
- A board of some sort I'd like. Just one to regulate trouble. We'd need a few ground rules defined (most of them are now in our heads) for them to function (settle disputes and sorts, 'coz those happen). Kicking from any forum would still be in the hands of mods/admins on those forums (accoring to GSF (and ForumPlanet) defined rules), not the board. They'd not have a lot of power, but they'd be there in case needed.
- Instead of or next to the board, sort of a 'council', like Dracion mentioned. The council would have side activities, next to posting, like hosting games, maintaining the server, mod/admin the forums, host/maintain the clan website. (Come on, you can say "elite", you know you want to!)

Am I trying to save my own ass? Again I say: of course! Who wouldn't? But apart from that, including posts (which is my problem) on both /gamespy and /gsf for members is still a good rule. A minimum number of posts is hard to define. I don't post that much (just look at my total right now), but I'd define myself active. I have my down periods and my up periods, like many do. All I'm saying is that it'll be tough to define "active" and satisfy everyone. Exceptions? Perhaps, but I'm a bit of an issue there myself, so of course I'd like an exception. I'll live by what will be decided from all this, but it's unlikely I'll change my posting behaviour because of it. If that means I'm a goner, so be it.</orange>

 

-----signature-----
------------------------------
"You don't appreciate a lot of stuff in school until you get older.
Little things like being spanked every day by a middle aged woman:
Stuff you pay good money for later in life." - Emo Philips
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History | Report Post,Report
1   2   3   4   5  
GameSpy Forums » Legacy GameSpy Forums » [GSF] Clan Business Proposed adjustments to GSF membership
© 2012 IGN Entertainment, Inc (9.02.17.2300, MEDIAPRDBOARD03) 0.078

IGN Entertainment
About Us | Advertise | Contact Us | Press | Careers
IGN | GameSpy | Comrade | Arena | FilePlanet | Direct2Drive | GameSpy Technology
TeamXbox | Game Sites | VE3D | CheatsCodesGuides | GameStats | GamerMetrics
AskMen | GIGA.DE | What They Play | Battlefield Heroes
By continuing past this page, and by your continued use of this site, you agree to be bound by and abide by the User Agreement.
Copyright 1996-2010, IGN Entertainment, Inc. | Support | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | RSS Feeds
IGN’s enterprise databases running Oracle, SQL and MySQL are professionally monitored and managed by Pythian Remote DBA.