Originally Posted by Smogard49
Judging my the date of those separate threads started by Gynx all I can see is a updated sticky after some major rules-update judging by the needs of a new thread. Also it were posted more than 100 hours after Jr were made aware of the CCs decision. As such it still does not strike me as unlikely that I, aswell as missuse, and surely other concerned parties, who spent hours looking for that information several hours prior to it being made public. I have yet to see why a decision where made prior to the grounds of it being posted. (In this case the new take on clan inactivity.)
Also, as far as I remember, No announcement of these changes were made to the respective maintainers of clans at this point, may I ask why? May I right-out ask if this were in an ill attempt to backstab those who do not tend to revisit stickies containing forum rules without being notified of such changes?
Does that mean you didn't read the previous rules?
Here's a link to Fish's set from Jan 28th 2011
That set predate your clan being official by a couple of months, so you've read them right?
*Official since Feb, 2011 according to the system - however the real date was March 27th
Here's the relevant section:
Originally Posted by Fish
Activity Checks
Clan Moderators check on official clans randomly. If a clan is found to lacking in too many ways, it will be shifted to the Dead Clans subforum. The things we look at are, participation in events and wars, In-game activity, IRC activity, forum activity, and post quality. If it doesn't look to bright we'll start asking questions.
If that rule was there in plain sight 4 year ago then we can't be backstabbing you with a sudden Gynx related change. Rest easy.
However JR are from before you lot though which gives a slight problem... I did a hunt for Delaid, Hamr & Manbreakfast's rule threads, but alas it seems theirs were killed at some point a couple of years ago.
Regardless, the rule was there back then too. It was there when my clan was made official in 08, it was there before then, it was there afterwards.
Nothing changed in that regard.
Look in the dead clan area and you'll see clans that predate JR were killed for inactivity - a few with their final moments way back in 07. Gotta love history.
<Erf> SkulFuk: gf just made a toilet sniffing joke at me
<Erf> i think
<Erf> i think i hate you
Originally Posted by SkulFuk
Does that mean you didn't read the previous rules?
Here's a link to Fish's set from Jan 28th 2011
That set predate your clan being official by a couple of months, so you've read them right?
*Official since Feb, 2011 according to the system - however the real date was March 27th
Your clan, I take it you mean Hung reborn aka fl0w? I'm pretty certain the original dates back to 3 or so years prior to that. And if it matters i believe i officially joined Hung in 2010, Dec(?).
"If an explanation isn't provided within a week" is what I remember existing in that line of the rules-text when it came to inactivity, am I wrong?
Now doing recoloring for people not in the clan as-well, PM for more info!
PROUD OWNER OF THORN'S GOOD ENOUGH WRITER AWARD!
PROUD OWNER OF THORN'S GOOD ENOUGH WRITER AWARD!
Why does it even matter if a clan is inactive? Trying to force clans to be active by threatening them with deletion is futile at best - and completely unproductive if you are specifically trying to delete them...
Overly vague rules can only be understood in the context of their enforcement.
If you want to make vague statements like "If a clan is found to lacking in too many ways" so you can give yourself leeway to moderate however you feel like at the time, then you have to accept that people are probably not going to magically know what you are thinking without asking...
Originally Posted by SkulFuk
Here's the relevant section:
Overly vague rules can only be understood in the context of their enforcement.
If you want to make vague statements like "If a clan is found to lacking in too many ways" so you can give yourself leeway to moderate however you feel like at the time, then you have to accept that people are probably not going to magically know what you are thinking without asking...
<Faint> the rules have been stated quite clearly 3 times now from high staff
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
Overly vague rules can only be understood in the context of their enforcement.
If you want to make vague statements like "If a clan is found to lacking in too many ways" so you can give yourself leeway to moderate however you feel like at the time, then you have to accept that people are probably not going to magically know what you are thinking without asking...
That's why I changed the rules, they were too haphazardly organised and poorly maintained. That set of rules is years before we changed activity checks for the better & there was another revision between that and the current one (made by LightningKid). Nobody's denying the old system was bad, that's why we changed it. Arguably, you could say that the old checks would have been harsher than these ones had they actually been done.
collect snots from the nose
Originally Posted by Gynx
Arguably, you could say that the old checks would have been harsher than these ones had they actually been done.
When it came to ingame & IRC specific clans "harsher" was an understatement.
<Erf> SkulFuk: gf just made a toilet sniffing joke at me
<Erf> i think
<Erf> i think i hate you
