Concerning ALLIANCE APPLICATION

[KingOfPain]

This is the first detailed proposal I've seen and it does take into consideration the opposing viewpoints. It allows "common sense" and debate to prevail initially, but has a backup process in case of muddy disagreements. So barring others having wildly different proposals, I suggest we take this a starting point for discussion.

One thing I don't like about the system given above is that while it requires a minimal initial involvement, it doesn't specifically encourage involvement beyond that. So in the first week period people that would otherwise have objections might never develop them, and then its difficult to object and remove the guild afterwards. I still like the idea of a "temporary" period as mandatory, it's the best way to get to know a guild in my opinion. This is how I would streamline the process:

- Four nominators from two+ guilds.

- Once requisite number of nominations is established, short period for initial objections (3 days or even less, but I could live with a week. Just that I think best way to get to know a guild is to expose them to everyone.)

- Two week "novice" period; guild is added to the alliance, but can't access alliance app forum.

- If no objections posted in alliance app forum during these two weeks, thread is deleted and they are given access. If objections are registered and not resolved, a poll is taken in the last week on whether to keep or eject. (Though generaly if vote goes the latter way, first suggest that they should leave of their own accord. )

What I like:

- gives new guilds a chance to "get a feel" for the alliance before being brought into decision-making process
- doesn't force and unduly long wait when the best evaluation is natural exposure, instead of a few members on "good behavior" during an evaluative period.
- gives people who might have objections plenty of opportunity to educate themselves and make said objections

P.S. I think the best compromise for the "private vs public" forum debate is that alliance apps and those only will be subject to private discussion. The forum should therefore be empty most of the time! There is no need to hide any other aspect of alliance discussion as was done on the ZoS forums, especially alliance events.

KoP

[Jude Phailin]

i realize that i haven't been around much the last week but is it possible that if this is the way that we want the Application process to be to merge this sticky with the one for the application...might be good for the guilds coming in to know what our way of doing things is...that and we can hopefully weed down the million-sticky-march.

Just my thoughts
Jude

[FoxBat]

Well, it would be nice if someone commented on it, period, first. I'm not going to argue against any alternative positions or adjustments put forth at this point, so critique away.

[KingOfPain]

Requirement to put up pertinent alliance information/links on their site/forum if they have one.

KoP

[FoxBat]

It light of our recent pow-wow, interested parties might want to "yay" or "nay" this proposal if they want to get some guilds invited.

[WarBlade]

In reading the thread starting post I find myself a bit puzzled by the four nominators thing.

I'd rather just leave it at a common committee proposal and ratification setup: 1 nominates, 1 seconds, a chair calls for yea/nay reponse and the matter goes through or gets rejected (or goes to the debate if need be). Setting a time limit for objections should cut any BS and once established the voting setup could be quickly co-opted for any other yes/no decisions we might find ourselves facing.

[KingOfPain]

I think we can work with the following for now. There's always room for improvement and we can add them as they come.

---------------------------------------------------------------
1/ Upon application, a thread would be posted in the Alliance Application Evaluation sub forum for a period of 3 days. There's no need to post unless someone have any objections to let the applying guild into a trial period.

2/ The applying guild would be invited into the alliance for a 2 weeks trial period. Please make an effort to get to know them.

3/ A poll will start after the first week of the trial period, and ends on the last day of the trial period.

4/ The applying guild will be a permanent ally, or kicked, based on this one week poll. Majority rules unless there are grievous oppositions.

5/ All threads in the Alliance Application Evaluation will be deleted before the applying guild is accepted as a permanent ally, and given access to the sub forum.
---------------------------------------------------------------

Did I forget anything?

KoP

[WarBlade]

It looks like one of our first applicants is going to be a new as-yet unnamed guild who's membership currently consists of [Fail]. They're disbanding and reforming apparently.

The point eludes me too.

[Sciros]

Maybe they don't like the name?

[theGrimm]

I think we can work with the following for now.



Did I forget anything?

KoP

That seems quite reasonable to me, and should get the job done. Can I suggest one more step? As soon as the vote has been opened, we put an announcement up in game (and leave it there for the duration) that an new ally is under consideration, and refer them to the required forum to comment or vote.