Founders Guild can not be ousted out or banned from their guild

[autumncast]

I would like to introduce a rule. That founders of a guild can not be ousted out or locked out. The only way they could give up their title is to send in a request to FOE asking that the title be removed and handed over to another person of their choosing. The Founder should be able to visit other guilds with his title and return back to his guild without provocation. A founder of a guild should be permanent. No founder should have their guild stolen away from them.

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

Just stay in your guild and don't give anyone else founder's rights. Problem (actually non-problem) solved.

 

[Mailia]

I don't see an option I agree with, so i'll just 'vote' here... founders aren't automatically saints, if they got kicked by their guild it's most likely for a reason, I've heard the horror stories but I don't think any of those are the right solution.

 

[autumncast]

I don't see an option I agree with, so i'll just 'vote' here... founders aren't automatically saints, if they got kicked by their guild it's most likely for a reason, I've heard the horror stories but I don't think any of those are the right solution

 

[autumncast]

No this is a ruling that is helpful to Founders. No one ever totally agree to the person organizing the guild. It's cons and pros to get the guild affective and off the ground and running. A founder has a lot of responsibility and determination to get the guild up and running

 

[xivarmy]

No this is a ruling that is helpful to Founders. No one ever totally agree to the person organizing the guild. It's cons and pros to get the guild affective and off the ground and running. A founder has a lot of responsibility and determination to get the guild up and running

And sometimes a founder moves on (either in game, or out of the game). Or wants to share the responsibility. And it's not fair to the new founder that they don't have all the same rights the original founder did - after all at some point the state of the guild may be more of their making than said original founder. Yes there's risks when you share founder duties - but sometimes those risks are worth it.

Particularly these days, the consequences for losing "your" guild are relatively low - some levels that are almost inconsequential, and the treasury, which might be more consequential - but is the product of more than just you, and still very replaceable. If people want to follow you still, create a new guild and it'll be up and running in no time.

If anything FoE is already very founder-centric where if you stay active and don't promote another founder, the guild is always yours. There's other games where the membership can stage a coup, calling for a vote on leadership and forcing an existing founder out - in FoE that only works on a voluntary basis with the cooperation of an existing founder Most splits come about by people leaving the guild and taking their friends with them to another guild(new or existing) that they believe will run the way a guild "should".

The only way an additional founder that can unseat you will be promoted without your say-so is if you're inactive for a prolonged period - this exists because sometimes founders disappear never to return, and it'd be a shame if an otherwise functional guild became defunct because of that. So if that happens another member will be automatically promoted. You can avoid this by not having guildmates or by not disappearing for long periods of time

 

[Emberguard]

There's room where Guild rights in general could be improved, but most of these options suggested don't make logical sense to me or are unclear on what it's actually suggesting

The should be a automated install of founder when visiting other guilds

Install of who to what Guild?

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

The solo guild I have on V was a multi-member guild for years, ranging from 7 to 25 members. During that time I had 1-2 Leaders at a time that I gave rights to, but never gave anyone founder's rights. Having had experience with many guilds and players in the past, I decided from the start that I was not going to take a chance on giving anyone the ability to tear down in any way what we had built up. Maybe some day I will pursue enlarging the guild again. If so, the same rule will apply. There is just no way of knowing what another player will do, unless maybe you know them personally outside the game. And then it's still only a maybe. The only player I know of in this game that I know that I can trust is me. And deep down, I think we all know that's true of all of us. Especially after the last few years, when so many people have shown themselves to be something other than what we thought they were.

 

[autumncast]

And sometimes a founder moves on (either in game, or out of the game). Or wants to share the responsibility. And it's not fair to the new founder that they don't have all the same rights the original founder did - after all at some point the state of the guild may be more of their making than said original founder. Yes there's risks when you share founder duties - but sometimes those risks are worth it.

Particularly these days, the consequences for losing "your" guild are relatively low - some levels that are almost inconsequential, and the treasury, which might be more consequential - but is the product of more than just you, and still very replaceable. If people want to follow you still, create a new guild and it'll be up and running in no time.

If anything FoE is already very founder-centric where if you stay active and don't promote another founder, the guild is always yours. There's other games where the membership can stage a coup, calling for a vote on leadership and forcing an existing founder out - in FoE that only works on a voluntary basis with the cooperation of an existing founder Most splits come about by people leaving the guild and taking their friends with them to another guild(new or existing) that they believe will run the way a guild "should".

The only way an additional founder that can unseat you will be promoted without your say-so is if you're inactive for a prolonged period - this exists because sometimes founders disappear never to return, and it'd be a shame if an otherwise functional guild became defunct because of that. So if that happens another member will be automatically promoted. You can avoid this by not having guildmates or by not disappearing for long periods of time

I'm relating to the guild original founder that built the foundation of the guild who kept it constantly running and functioning. FOE CEO understand what I'm saying. There are always coup in every function of society. But there are always establishments. That's why I implemented this conversation. Implementation of permanent status in place would eliminate this problem. I have been playing FOE from the beginning. When there were ghost guilds. Guildlines and rules were made. We no longer have ghost guilds. If you leave a guild you're out for days before you cab return to your guild. Those rules were implemented after voting and bringing to FOE attention. There are a lot of implementation over the years.
I you make an agreement with someone you trust. And because they decide out of failing into an entanglement with a member cause their poor judgment create a problem. Especially if the person never learn how to fight in GVG until 2 months ago after being trained by the founder. And they are a trunk travel and away two weeks out of a month. And can't receive wifi. And the founder taught them assisted them in everything they needed to know. Spoken sometimes daily and weekly.

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

I'm relating to the guild original founder that built the foundation of the guild who kept it constantly running and functioning. FOE CEO understand what I'm saying. There are always coup in every function of society. But there are always establishments. That's why I implemented this conversation. Implementation of permanent status in place would eliminate this problem. I have been playing FOE from the beginning. When there were ghost guilds. Guildlines and rules were made. We no longer have ghost guilds. If you leave a guild you're out for days before you cab return to your guild. Those rules were implemented after voting and bringing to FOE attention. There are a lot of implementation over the years.
I you make an agreement with someone you trust. And because they decide out of failing into an entanglement with a member cause their poor judgment create a problem. Especially if the person never learn how to fight in GVG until 2 months ago after being trained by the founder. And they are a trunk travel and away two weeks out of a month. And can't receive wifi. And the founder taught them assisted them in everything they needed to know. Spoken sometimes daily and weekly.

I'm glad you brought up ghost guilds. Since "we no longer have ghost guilds", why on earth would a founder have to "go visiting" other guilds?!? It was a choice. Period. There are consequences to choices, especially bad ones. Like trusting someone else with your guild. And there's already a solution in place:

Just stay in your guild and don't give anyone else founder's rights. Problem (actually non-problem) solved.

No need for new guidelines or rules. Just don't do it. End of story. (Although apparently your founder already did it, so...)

 

[autumncast]

I brought the issue up in the forum to have the community vote on my suggestion. FOE founders and members of the game are interested. I working towards getting more communities and players involved. Thanks for your reply. I've never met whereas all players agree to new ideas. There is always resistants and opinions. I follow the constitution. When the game was first created 70% of the guidelines were not present. Someone new ideas to the CEO's of the company and new rules and guidelines were created. Members pf the game made suggestion just as I'm doing.You're entitled to your opinion.
Hopefully founder of FOE or CEO and installers of the game can create this graph into the game. They have specialities. It's call being inventive and future progress. You have a great team of creators that can do this kind of stuff.

 

[autumncast]

(Although apparently your founder already did it, so...) This is the purpose of me fighting to have it revoke. It can be done by the creators of FOE and CEO.

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

(Although apparently your founder already did it, so...) This is the purpose of me fighting to have it revoke. It can be done by the creators of FOE and CEO.

You're missing the point. There is no good reason for a founder to leave his guild to travel to other guilds. And if he does, he takes the chance that he may not get his guild back. There is no logical reason to change this. Have you noticed that not one person has agreed with your suggestion?

I brought the issue up in the forum to have the community vote on my suggestion.

And we've "voted". Most by ignoring the whole thread. (Thread has 313 views, yet only 6 players bothered to post in it.) The rest of us by telling you we don't agree that this is a good change for the game. So we "voted" and the result was a resounding no from the community. So give it up.

 

[xivarmy]

I brought the issue up in the forum to have the community vote on my suggestion. FOE founders and members of the game are interested. I working towards getting more communities and players involved. Thanks for your reply. I've never met whereas all players agree to new ideas. There is always resistants and opinions. I follow the constitution. When the game was first created 70% of the guidelines were not present. Someone new ideas to the CEO's of the company and new rules and guidelines were created. Members pf the game made suggestion just as I'm doing.You're entitled to your opinion.
Hopefully founder of FOE or CEO and installers of the game can create this graph into the game. They have specialities. It's call being inventive and future progress. You have a great team of creators that can do this kind of stuff.

Your suggestion lacks an option for "none of the above" to be a proper vote. There is nothing I could check in that list and agree with.

 

[Flynn013]

I would like to introduce a rule. That founders of a guild can not be ousted out or locked out. The only way they could give up their title is to send in a request to FOE asking that the title be removed and handed over to another person of their choosing. The Founder should be able to visit other guilds with his title and return back to his guild without provocation. A founder of a guild should be permanent. No founder should have their guild stolen away from them.

I'm not following you, a player can't be a member of more than one guild at a time. There is no visiting other guilds, either you are a member or not. If you are a founder once you leave a guild you are no longer a founder and if you want to rejoin you are just a member again.

 

[Xenosaur]

@autumncast - The bottom line: To have flexibility in the game, vs being tied with a ball and chain for fear of losing your founder crown permanently = (guild hijack...)

Find someone you can trust to run the guild and RESTORE your founder crown when you return - if you want or have to leave.

There are such people here in the game, who's word is their BOND and who have that credibility.

If you HAVE NOT chosen wisely (as the knight templar in Indiana Jones and the Last CRUSADE indicated you must do...)

That's on you. Or as advised - Don't ever leave

And if you ever used a baby sitter for your family, so you and your "significant other" can have a nite out, don't give the baby sitter your poll, or a legal agreement. You have to trust them with a more precious cargo than a guild - your KIDS and pets and house.

 

[Mor-Rioghain]

I honestly cannot see the reason(s) that any of these suggestions would be of any interest to the developers and even to most players. The only thing "special" about a founder is that that one individual pressed the key "create" instead of "join." I'm with those who are saying it's the way it is and has been for 10+ years for a reason so why should the company be involved in what amounts to player disputes? Inno has never and probably will never involved themselves in guilds' "doings," i.e., politics, etc. so I hardly see them starting at this late date.

No guild, no treasury, no reputation is so important that it can't be started over with the people you'd actually like to be with by creating another guild. It may not seem 'fair' but it's real.

 

[Mailia]

As a guild leader: If I theoretically went and visited another guild for some reason I can't currently think of, and my guild didn't want me back, i'd certainly be sad... but i'd also know that if I was a bad enough leader that my guild felt the need to deny me re-entry, then clearly i've been doing wrong by them and they're probably better off without me. Bottom line is if your guildies actually trust you, this would never happen... and if they don't, then you should be working with them to build that trust instead of 'visiting' other guilds. (imo) It's your own d*mn fault if your guildies don't trust you/you don't trust your guildies.

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

Back in the day I knew a number of guild founders who would visit other guilds, usually ones on life support, looking for members who found themselves in a dead guild and were able to be moved over. Those founders often created alt accounts simply for the purpose of transferring the founder rights to while the player was away. Don't know if this happens anymore.

Seems like the best option for someone not wanting to be in a top competitive guild is just to create a solo guild and do GE and GBG on their own, join a few global 1.95/1.93/1.9 threads as appropriate, and call it good. No worries about who the founder is there, and all your guild treasury needs will be covered by GB's and event buildings if your city is advanced enough.

 

[Mailia]

Back in the day I knew a number of guild founders who would visit other guilds, usually ones on life support, looking for members who found themselves in a dead guild and were able to be moved over. Those founders often created alt accounts simply for the purpose of transferring the founder rights to while the player was away. Don't know if this happens anymore.

Seems like the best option for someone not wanting to be in a top competitive guild is just to create a solo guild and do GE and GBG on their own, join a few global 1.95/1.93/1.9 threads as appropriate, and call it good. No worries about who the founder is there, and all your guild treasury needs will be covered by GB's and event buildings if your city is advanced enough.

Alt's are against the game rules... i'm sure it still happens, but it's not really an option for anyone who doesn't want to risk getting banned.