Trial Members and Officers

[darkswan]

I'm at the brain storming stage on this one. I need to sort these rules out I know.

Given that we have a responsibility to the rest of clanuk, much as we'd like to get people onboard quickly, we should take as long as it takes.

My understanding is trials are normally one or two months, and members only get to trial one person at a time. We probably have more time than we imagine. Time passes quickly. But I'd like to get people officially trialled sooner rather than later, giving us a bigger pool of sponsors for more trials later.

For the time being let's keep to one trialist per sponsor (who is a full member).

A trial probably needs at least four game sessions and five YES votes at this early stage, taking no less than one month. Standard clanuk criteria apply i.e competent, considerate, general good egg. Playing 24/7 is NOT required

The sponsor should make the time to play with the trialist to hit the four sessions, and ensure at least five people have been involved to take part in the vote. Rather than leaving the sponsor to his own devices, the officers (and that means GM too!) should make themselves available to play with the trialists. Hopefully that way we can meet the 1 month period. If this hasn't been met then barring any NO votes, the trial will be extended.

So being an officer ain't exactly a bowl of roses if you like to do your own thing all the time.

Anyone else can help out too of course!

And if we get more members on board this all becomes a lot easier.
But lets get our untrialled peeps in the system first before we look for more.

Of course there are always special cases like someone who wants to be in the Guild but not Clan UK. Do we allow this? If so, we should probably have a shadow trial anyway (though not taking an actual sponsor's trial slot) and have a vote after a specified period. Otherwise we're going to end up with Guild members that we can't keep in contact with.

Feel free to comment. I'm rarely right first pass

DS

 

[Zeus]

i'd suggest that, as a guild ingame, we want quite a few members.
to that end, we should allow people to join the ingame guild immediately, probably without any playing knowledge of the person (although a quest run of some sort islikely, as how we met them in the place)
following that, they have the choice of remaining in the guild just to game with us, or joining ClanUK as a whole, which means registering on the forums. At whcih point, sponsorship becomes an issue, and preferably each of us should only trial one person at once (although, more is possible).
After a month (or 2, or whatever) of trialling, theres a vote held... at which forum and in game activity is considered. so basically we dont need a lot of in game members, as the trialists will also be trialled based on forum activity and behavior...

 

[darkswan]

I thought I'd ask the peeps who play first. Then perhaps run it past Rocdale and some of the other GMs to see if they really want 'un-managed' ppl playing in CUK colours.

Ultimately having people with board access would be so much better for group communications. I think there's always likely to be a tension between wanting many people in the guild and sticking to CUK entrance rules. No point getting frustrated about it. We just need to find a way that works.

One of my concerns is ppl not on the boards feeling left out.

I'm still flexible. Just talking out loud.

 

[Byzah]

Full Member - Full member of Clan UK
Trial Member - Registered on the boards & undergoing 1-2 month trial
Non Member - Not registered on boards (or acct not enabled yet as trial)

ALL of the above can read this forum (i.e., Joe Public can read it). They just can't post.

A small guild can tolerate a few non-members. A mid-sized guild probably can't.

I'd suggest "small" is less than 20 active members. We're currently at about 10. More like "teeny"

We should definitely encourage the non-members to register here and start a Trial Membership, however.

As long as it's clear who is sponsoring whom, it should be OK to sponsor more than 1 person at once. I think this is preferable to making would-be trialees queue for the privilege - or people having to sponsor people they don't really know because the person who knows them best is already busy sponsoring another.

e.g. - there are 4 people currently on the roster that I know well - Malvolio, Hecuva (Rhyn), Summer and Avar (Welfok).

Obviously, it would make most sense for me to sponsor all 4 of them.

(Although we may have lost Summer and Avar, to judge from their recent online time? -- I can find out, as I have their email addresses).

 

[darkswan]

Full Member - Full member of Clan UK
Trial Member - Registered on the boards & undergoing 1-2 month trial
Non Member - Not registered on boards (or acct not enabled yet as trial)

ALL of the above can read this forum (i.e., Joe Public can read it). They just can't post.

I know. Just a bit concerned about people feeling left out or overlooked. Which is why I wanted to get our current crop through the system sooner rather than later. That's all.

A small guild can tolerate a few non-members. A mid-sized guild probably can't.

I'd suggest "small" is less than 20 active members. We're currently at about 10. More like "teeny"

We should definitely encourage the non-members to register here and start a Trial Membership, however.

As long as it's clear who is sponsoring whom, it should be OK to sponsor more than 1 person at once. I think this is preferable to making would-be trialees queue for the privilege - or people having to sponsor people they don't really know because the person who knows them best is already busy sponsoring another.

That makes sense. So long as we already have some knowledge of them. Maybe keep it to one sponsorship only of someone we have no previous knowledge of e.g. from a PUG. Still tink we should have a play session and min vote number rule for all though. But haggle with me on the numbers

e.g. - there are 4 people currently on the roster that I know well - Malvolio, Hecuva (Rhyn), Summer and Avar (Welfok).

Obviously, it would make most sense for me to sponsor all 4 of them.

OK. go for it.

(Although we may have lost Summer and Avar, to judge from their recent online time? -- I can find out, as I have their email addresses).

Looks like. Shame
I'd be interested in some feedback on the reason.
For a hopeless techie I've been doing a fair amount of customer hand-holding the last couple of years, so I do tend to ask these things in case there's anything we could have done better.

 

[Byzah]

I kind of bullied them into playing as they'd not played with me for a long time. They're not like Steve B who actually *want* to play GW

Rhyn will probably continue to toy with the game, whereas Summer & Avar are likely done with it - just doesn't seem to have bitten any of them. It might have helped if I were playing more myself, but I was/am busy. Plus, for some reason, GW interferes with my sleep, making me more reluctant to play it. I guess it's more intense than the typical mmorpg session (raiding in EQ1 also interfered with my sleep - main reason I quit it).

I could re-enable EQ1 (as it's currently free for 21 days) and track them down & harrass them, of course

 

[darkswan]

I could re-enable EQ1 (as it's currently free for 21 days) and track them down & harrass them, of course

Don't be silly. We are chilled out here in CUK

I do worry that lack of board access makes ppl feel 2nd class citizens that's all.

If they don't like the game fair enough. If they felt let down by us in some way, then that's something we could address in future. But I suspect it's the former.

 

[Taz]

TBH having people playing in the guild in game without them eventually becoming members of ClanUK will probably generate more trouble than its worth. Especially communicating to them PvP events or big Mission runs and the like. Its likely to get VERY confusing....especially in the unlikely event of someone needing to be reprimanded for breaking guild ethos, i.e. you can't enforce ClanUK regulations on someone who isn't affiliated with ClanUK.