Keefie wrote:I really don't feel comfortable seeing personalities being picked apart in public. The clan department does a frigging good job and I certainly don't see any bias or special treatment for one group of clans over another.
If there was a major clan issue between myself and someone from KoRT/NewBullshitClan like Bruce or Josko, do you really think both sides would be treated in the same way?
MudPuppy wrote:Please complete the quote:
1) "invested much payola"
2) "seen tapeworms"
3) "never-ending faith"
4) "helped insert gerbils"
5) All of the above
Thanks for the kind words, Caffeine. I'll do my best.
Oops! You can choose whichever phrase you like.
--
IcePack wrote:Lindax / others have replied to this before I could. Regardless of who said what or how etc, I agree everyone should treat the rest with respect and expect to receive the same in return. At the same time, there should be respect given to those who volunteer their time and spend the time planning the events and activities we all enjoy here on Conquer Club, understanding that its a big job, there are 100 different ways to do things and not everyones going to do it the same way, and not everything is going to change all the time. There was some feedback that was given and it was changed or likely would change (coming to mind, different settings, or trench %'s etc without going and looking for the others) but maybe not everything. Someone has been tasked to run the tournament and adapt the rules to meet certain guidelines. Feedback is appreciated, but ultimately they are the ones responsible to meet the criteria set before them. I think some things are strongly opposed for wahtever reason (like random draws, i know i was part of that) and once it happens, we find out it wasn't a big deal. This maybe one of those things, once its tried we can see how it goes. If these changes make the tournament schedule goals, great. If it fails to, it can be reevaluated based on the results, and how people felt it went afterwards.
I want to say that unlike some things on Conquer Club, just because it changes one thing and then refuses to never change it back - we will try to remain open minded based on results and feedback. We know the 41 game issue is a concern, and it will be evaluated and considered before moving forward etc, and then if we move ahead its not because certain groups or clans have our ear while others dont, there are many things to consider and at the end we can evaluate it based on results. If we have all the same problems that we did previously - event is to long etc and people didn't "get what they wanted" well then its not really achieving anything and we can revert back if needed, or listen to new suggestions based on what we find as the result.
I'm not taking issues with the fact that rules and events are changing. In fact quite the opposite, supposing that things would stagnate or never improve otherwise. The problem is how feedback from clan leaders/members is dealt with, especially when it's been requested in the first place. Of course the Directors should be shown respect but in the public eye I'd say they're given a lot more respect than they reciprocate. You've pretty much deflected from the main point; obviously changes are necessary, as are opinions on the performance of those alterations. What isn't needed is the disregard in which some clan leaders/members are treated with.
IcePack wrote:Foeing is a site wide feature, you seem to be upset that you've been foed as you bring it up pretty consistently. If the site had seperate game / forum foes, then I would utilize that. But since they dont, I had you on foe you are correct. But that is past tense, I've had you unfoed for several weeks now. As for it making "contact inconvenient" it still allows you to PM me, which is my preferred method of communication anyway (the only thing it removes as an option is the wall which I hate) so I really dont see what is so inconvenient about it. You at one point asked for my personal email, which I dont give out to anyone outside of my clan, but I did offer my skype so you could contact me whenever. Again, trying to make myself more available (something you did not take up, which I can't control). I would prefer to keep you on foe for the game related stuff, but since clicking "display the post" was annoying, it was removed. But again, this really has nothing to do with being impartial or giving preferential treatment to anyone, so I really have no idea why you are posting about it when I'm asking for suggestions in how to improve the clan world. I've always replied to your PM's fully, unbiased, and even encouraged you to apply as a CD when you were on the fence. If I really "had it in for you" or allowed minor disputes get in the way, I would be ignoring your PM's, ignoring your posts, and wouldn't have told you to apply because I wouldn't have cared one way or the other. Enough said, if you want to chat more about this I'm happy to do so over PM.
Clearly there has been some miscommunication along the line. I've never requested your personal email, that's just weird. I have your Skype, just rarely use it. I have to clear my PMs about twice a week so at times a quick wall message is much more preferable. Perhaps I just think that using your foe list at all as a department head (unless the person involved doesn't use the forums) is poor practice. I don't recall ever being on the fence about applying for a CD position, my stance was more like "I'll be told to shove off but here you go". You did encourage me to do so, but we both know that was futile and was more of a professional encouragement. I don't really care about that as I don't have the time to dedicate anyway. Plus, once upon a time someone tried to make a mod without my knowledge and it was disallowed. Fun times.
Stop assuming all the issues I raise are in regards to preferential treatment for other clans/leaders. I've already stated that isn't the case.
IcePack wrote:This is pretty much 100% completely false. There is no "hierarchy" or preferential treatment or prioritising clans needs over others. I would love to hear specific examples of how this is the case, at all.
Regarding the clan merger which is the only example you gave, doc has it pretty much 100% correct. ACE and S&M and MMM all were given the same directions / options as to what to expect and what the options were. This was not some big conspiracy to screw over one clan, or give different treatments to different clans. Every merger had one of two options and explained what that meant for them. S&M and MMM choose one option, while ACE chose another knowing what it meant.
There are clear guidelines and rules as for merging, which is explained to any clan that brings up an interest in the possibility (generally they make contact because they are keen to know on how it affects their participation etc in big clan tournaments).
But this has been gone over with each clan and clarified every time, and has been discussed in public several times as well.
Having the two options is ridiculous. There was apparent outrage when ACE formed because it was the first time anything like that had been done officially and I think people just reacted without giving much consideration. That method is a lot fairer than the S&M bullshit, you can't disagree. Clans shouldn't be given two options, there should be one and it should be the same for everyone as it was for ACE.
Where these "rules" established before S&M began? I mean exactly as they are now, but before the "merge". I'd bet if MMM tried to pull this off, being the only ones to do so post-ACE, they would not have received the same treatment as KoRT&Wannabees, but since two big names decided they wanted it, they got it; same way it always is. The only other non-mods presenting arguments here are Doc_Brown (TOFU) and shoop (ATL). Funny how the high rank disagrees and the mediocre agrees. Whether deliberate or not, there are two issues that need addressing: the merging system and how high ranked clans are treated compared to low.
Regarding the joining of MM members to TOFU, that's a baseless argument.
Doc_Brown wrote:I thought the rule was pretty clear? Clans can rename themselves if they wish. One clan may pick up new members that leave behind an old clan. There is no limit on how many members they can pick up from the old clan - all of them if that is the wish of all parties. If a clan no longer has members, it is disbanded. TOFU picked up a few members from MM without any re-branding, and MM absorbed MYTH and re-branded itself. The result is MYTH is no more and both TOFU and the former MM are still active. KORT absorbed members from TSM and decided to re-brand.
When ACE formed out of AOC and EMP, there was a significant outcry about their scrapping their record and re-starting as a brand new clan. Multiple people cried foul and strongly recommended that either AOC absorb EMP or vice versa so that their opponents in clan wars wouldn't have to face a very strong clan with a low clan rank. They chose not to go that route. Other clan mergers decided not to go through all of that, and now they're getting criticized for doing what a lot of people wished ACE had done!
It's like you've taken each factor of the merge/issue and addressed them separately, which is completely pointless. So what if TOFU picked up a few members? It's a few members therefore nothing to do with the clan merge whatsoever; pointless. Like I said, if two lesser clans had tried to do what the cows and monkeys did it wouldn't have been allowed.
