Changes to the Stormrage Guild system

[Tal]

Eventually the guild is going to grow large enough that we will need to have an established means of keeping the 1337 “doodz” and folks who are not “Lurker” material at bay. To this end I am creating and setting up, with Roane’s assistance, a rank system for the guild. Here are the ranks that are being put into place:

1. Guildmaster -- leader of the guild, able to set and adjust ranks and permissions. Current game mechanics dictate that there can only be one of these.

2. Lounger -- officers of the guild, who are responsible for the day to day maintenance and smooth operation of the guild. They have the ability to promote and invite guild members and change the guild message of the day. Also, an officer is the person to go to when advice or conflict resolution is needed. This rank is made up primarily of those who have demonstrated in depth knowledge of the game, or have demonstrated leadership qualities. Limited to 9 positions initially, more will be added if necessary.

3. Lurker -- general membership of the guild. Able to invite, edit their own public note and talk in guild chat.

4. Lounge Lizard -- temporary position used for invitations extended to those with whom the guild has little experience. It is a trial position used solely in uncommon circumstances when a promotion to Lurker is not yet assured due to lack of familiarity. Able to talk in guild chat.

5. Initiate -- newly invited into the guild. Able to talk in guild chat. Most people will be promoted to Lurker immediately, assuming they are registered on the boards or are otherwise known to existing guild members.

My intention with this is an attempt to keep the easy going feel from our days in the Beta but also have the means to protect the interests of the guild from harm. In a MMORPG your reputation is all that you have to go by and I would prefer that no one have a reason to not group with a Lurker.

As of right now these folk will be Loungers:
Bolty, Bun-Bun, Gnollguy, Lissa, Lochnar, Occhi, Roane, Ruvunal, and Warlocke.

For the time being we’re stuck with the Sex-goddess rank until I hear back from a GM on why I can’t delete this joke rank even though the interface shows that we should be able to delete it. If you invite someone to the guild ask an officer to promote to Lurker if you know them well, to Lounge Lizard if you don't know them but they seem like good lurker material.

[LochnarITB]

I would like to make a suggestion. For those players we add as Lounge Lizard or Initiate, which would mean that they are not currently registered at the LL, we would refer them to the LL to register and make an introductory post. We could have a pinned thread, such as the D1 Meet'n'Greet, for them to make these posts. Current Lurkers could also post their character info there so that those of us with poor associative thinking (or failing oldtimers memory such as myself?) can keep all the alts straight. If we didn't want a new pinned thread, the Lurker Lounge Servers thread could be used. This would give them a chance to come, look around and get an idea of the type of player we expect to associate with as a Lurker. Once they had made that post and decided if they wanted to be held to the LL "standards", they would then be promoted to Lurker. We could have some basic info in the first post of that thread, such as the chat channels used (other than guild chat, lurkers and honorables currently), tabard info (cost, where to buy) and any other little tidbits that we don't otherwise think to tell people who start with us.

[LavCat]

Eventually the guild is going to grow large enough that we will need to have an established means of keeping the 1337 “doodz” and folks who are not “Lurker” material at bay.
[right][snapback]64240[/snapback][/right]

I agree that there is a potential problem, but I think this is an utterly bad solution. What you propose, Tal, seems far different from what we had in beta that worked so well.

People in the guild should be limited to posters on the forum. If we don't want them in one, we don't want them in the other. I can live with having a period of initiation if you believe such is necessary, but beyond that I ask you to reconsider making any changes to the guild structure.

Was there any in-game incident that led you this decision?

[Tal]

I agree that there is a potential problem, but I think this is an utterly bad solution.  What you propose, Tal, seems far different from what we had in beta that worked so well.[right][snapback]64252[/snapback][/right]

Actually the only power you had in Beta that you don't now possess is the abillity promote someone. If a guild member is an established member of the community or a friend of an established Lurker (such as yourself) they will get promoted to Lurker. I'm still trying to maintain the easy going guild we had in Beta while still protecting the best interests of the Guild.

People in the guild should be limited to posters on the forum.  If we don't want them in one, we don't want them in the other.  I can live with having a period of initiation if you believe such is necessary, but beyond that I ask you to reconsider making any changes to the guild structure.
[right][snapback]64252[/snapback][/right]

I really don't see how an inititation period is any different than what I have already proposed. If a someone from the Lurker Lounge purchases WoW they will be welcomed into the Guild and promoted to Lurker. If it is a friend of a Lurker they too will be welcomed and promoted. The difference lies in that I am encouraging Lurkers to invite folks that they meet in the game into the fold if they feel like the candidates could be Lurkers. If they don't work out then a Officer or myself will boot them. Officers will be "mentors" to those new to the game but will also help to mediate any issues that come up between Lurkers. I'd much rather have a low key system in place now than have to be heavy handed when a real problem develops. :)

Was there any in-game incident that led you this decision?
[right][snapback]64252[/snapback][/right]

There were actually several incidents that I won't discuss publically that lead me to this decision.

[MongoJerry]

Eventually the guild is going to grow large enough that we will need to have an established means of keeping the 1337 “doodz” and folks who are not “Lurker” material at bay. To this end I am creating and setting up, with Roane’s assistance, a rank system for the guild. Here are the ranks that are being put into place:

My worry about ranks is that they can become a slippery slope. The idealist in me feels that the only ranks the Lurker Lounge needs are those that one earns by reputation throught creating articulate posts with well thought out information and arguments. The idealist in me sees no need for formal ranks at all. The practical side of me, however, realizes that some structure is necessary. Still, that structure should only be what is necessary to meet the needs of the community and shouldn't be overly complicated. I especially want to avoid new people feeling that the Lurker Lounge in-game "guild" is some sort of clique.

Again, I must emphasize that the Lurker Lounge is not a guild and that the only reason we have these in-game "guilds" is to make it easier for Lurkers unaffiliated with a guild to find one another in game. These "guilds" are meant to be casual affairs. If a person wants a more rigid structure with a more formal vetting process for new members, then that person should join a more formal guild like the Amazon Basin. Our goal here is not to duplicate the work of the Amazon Basin or any other guilds. Instead, we are a site dedicated to bringing together players of all guilds and backgrounds together to intelligently share information and ideas with one another. If we formalize some sort of guild structure that looks too much like a formal guild, it could look to others from the outside that we are simply yet-another-guild-site. I want to avoid this strenuously.

To that end, I want to hear a good justification for the proposed rankings.

1. Guildmaster -- leader of the guild, able to set and adjust ranks and permissions. Current game mechanics dictate that there can only be one of these.

The game requires that there be one and only one of these, so obviously this has to stay.

2. Lounger -- officers of the guild, who are responsible for the day to day maintenance and smooth operation of the guild. They have the ability to promote and invite guild members and change the guild message of the day. Also, an officer is the person to go to when advice or conflict resolution is needed. This rank is made up primarily of those who have demonstrated in depth knowledge of the game, or have demonstrated leadership qualities. Limited to 9 positions initially, more will be added if necessary.

3. Lurker -- general membership of the guild. Able to invite, edit their own public note and talk in guild chat.

It's here I don't understand. What is the difference between these two groups and why does there need to be a distinction between them? As I read it, the officer group has the additional ability to set the motd and promote people. But if we can't trust a person to be able to handle the responsibilities that come with those abilities, then would you want to play with them? If you don't trust them to be responsible members in the guild, then don't invite them into the guild in the first place.

It's this differentiation between some "better" officer group and the general Lurker group that makes me queasy. What is your justification for making this seperation?

4. Lounge Lizard -- temporary position used for invitations extended to those with whom the guild has little experience. It is a trial position used solely in uncommon circumstances when a promotion to Lurker is not yet assured due to lack of familiarity. Able to talk in guild chat.

5. Initiate -- newly invited into the guild. Able to talk in guild chat. Most people will be promoted to Lurker immediately, assuming they are registered on the boards or are otherwise known to existing guild members.

I see no difference between these two groups. Both are new members whose only priviledges are being able to read and write to the guild chat.

The difference lies in that I am encouraging Lurkers to invite folks that they meet in the game into the fold if they feel like the candidates could be Lurkers.

I agree that there is a potential problem, but I think this is an utterly bad solution. What you propose, Tal, seems far different from what we had in beta that worked so well.

People in the guild should be limited to posters on the forum. If we don't want them in one, we don't want them in the other. I can live with having a period of initiation if you believe such is necessary, but beyond that I ask you to reconsider making any changes to the guild structure.

Here, I agree strongly with LavCat. If you feel a person is Lurker material, then that person should be encouraged to look at the website and become members of the forums. That person should not be recruited into the "guild" first. Only after the person joins and participates in the forums should they be encouraged to join the "guild." Members of the "guild" should only be those Lurkers who are known quantities on the site and to a lesser extent close friends and family. The focus of the Lurker Lounge is the website and forums -- not the individual "guilds" on the individual servers.

[Treesh]

I especially want to avoid new people feeling that the Lurker Lounge in-game "guild" is some sort of clique.[right][snapback]64280[/snapback][/right]

Members of the "guild" should only be those Lurkers who are known quantities on the site and to a lesser extent close friends and family.  [right][snapback]64280[/snapback][/right]

Maybe I'm just dense, but don't these two statements slightly contradict one another? When would you consider new people a known quantity on the site? Only those who post frequently and well thought out posts to boot? What about those who don't care to post a lot, but love to lurk and read and are great in game? How will they become known enough to "allow" into the guild? Tal's initiation stages in game help that out. The new person sees lurkers helping other people (or is helped himself) frequently, parties with lurkers a few times, is a great player, asks to join but is turned down and told to go to a webpage and post before being considered? Seems awfully cliquish to me. With tal's intiation stage, he's in, and is more likely to visit the boards and become a part of the LurkerLounge. It's more open, but still allows the maintaining of standards.

[MongoJerry]

After giving this some thought, I think the real issue here isn't guild rankings -- it's the issue of recruitment. As we adventure, we all run into good worthy players whom we feel could be assets to our community. The question is how do we go about that recruitment process? My feeling is that the individual "guilds" on the servers are not the correct way to recruit new people. Instead, new people should be referred to the website and forums, and the "guilds" should only be reserved for those players who have been shown to be members in good standing on the forums. In other words, a recruitment conversation could look like this:

"Lurkers? What's that?"

"Oh! It's a group of us who read the strategy website, The Lurker Lounge. You should check it out. http://www.lurkerlounge.com/ "

"Is that a guild?"

"Not really. It's a website for discussing WoW strategy and is open for everyone. Some of us decided to make an WoW guild so that we could find each other in-game. You should check out the site. It's great!"

"Ah, ok. Cool."


On the other hand, a recruitment conversation should never look like this:

"Lurkers? What's that?"

"Oh, it's a cool guild. Want to join?"


To that end, back to the discussion of rankings, I guess the one ranking I don't see a need for is Lounge Lizard. Basically, if there's a person who we don't know well enough to trust with Lurkers powers, then I'd rather not have that person be in the guild in the first place. The various Lurker Lounge guilds should only be made up of people whom we know well and trust.

[Occhidiangela]

Maybe I'm just dense, but don't these two statements slightly contradict one another?  When would you consider new people a known quantity on the site?  Only those who post frequently and well thought out posts to boot?  What about those who don't care to post a lot, but love to lurk and read and are great in game? How will they become known enough to "allow" into the guild?  Tal's initiation stages in game help that out.  The new person sees lurkers helping other people (or is helped himself) frequently, parties with lurkers a few times, is a great player, asks to join but is turned down and told to go to a webpage and post before being considered?  Seems awfully cliquish to me.  With tal's intiation stage, he's in, and is more likely to visit the boards and become a part of the LurkerLounge.  It's more open, but still allows the maintaining of standards.
[right][snapback]64282[/snapback][/right]

To the group.

1. Treesh hits on an important point. Not everyone who loves to play and who is fun to play with is necessarily going to be an active poster on the site. Some folks play more and post less, yet are great fun to play with.

We may see, in the case of folks who are fun to play with, a slow escalation in forum game discussion as they feel more comfortable telling funny stories of raids gone amok, or well, or a neato game feature they want to discuss. Comfort zones differ.

That said, I agree with Mongo Jerry on how to approach getting a new player into the gang.

2. As to ranks, I agree with Mongo. Three is enough (one, two, five -- NO, three sir!) Guild Master, Lurker, and Initiate/Gekko/what have you/probationer.

The less formal and structured, the better.

My dos centavos

Occhi

[Tal]

Again, I must emphasize that the Lurker Lounge is not a guild and that the only reason we have these in-game "guilds" is to make it easier for Lurkers unaffiliated with a guild to find one another in game.  These "guilds" are meant to be casual affairs.  If a person wants a more rigid structure with a more formal vetting process for new members, then that person should join a more formal guild like the Amazon Basin.  Our goal here is not to duplicate the work of the Amazon Basin or any other guilds.  Instead, we are a site dedicated to bringing together players of all guilds and backgrounds together to intelligently share information and ideas with one another.  If we formalize some sort of guild structure that looks too much like a formal guild, it could look to others from the outside that we are simply yet-another-guild-site.  I want to avoid this strenuously.[right][snapback]64280[/snapback][/right]

I can understand where you're coming from completely and wish to avoid this as well. However the guild is growing by leaps and bounds and I don't wish to limit folks to not inviting their friends or people they have met in game. Requiring them to make themselves known at the Lurker Lounge before becomming a Lurker in the guild seems counter-intuitive to not being just another guild site. My feelings are that if they are a friend of a Lurker than they are a friend of mine. I certainly do point them to the site for discussion and strategy but it isn't in my something they are required to visit to keep playing with us.

It's here I don't understand.  What is the difference between these two groups and why does there need to be a distinction between them?  As I read it, the officer group has the additional ability to set the motd and promote people.  But if we can't trust a person to be able to handle the responsibilities that come with those abilities, then would you want to play with them?  If you don't trust them to be responsible members in the guild, then don't invite them into the guild in the first place.[right][snapback]64280[/snapback][/right]

My intention is for the Guild MOTD to be utilized to set up Guild dungeon and raid groups. It is also to be used to spread information that the entire guild needs to know, such as the cross-guild chat channel we share with the Basin. I do NOT want it to be used for "Eat at Joes" type of Spam. While I can't guarantee that it would be used for that purpose - just because I don't want people playing with the shiney toy does not mean I don't want to play with them. I also wish to avoid the problem of "vetting" people folks meet in the game based on a few encounters. We've already had some issues in regards to the sharing of loot, lack of understanding of what it means to be a Lurker (ie the person was not being entirely honorable in their play), etc. My hope is that rank will not be an issue at all that we will still remain a collection of friends playing a game we love and not a Guild. The idealistic side of me was hoping that folks would see it less as a change of structure but a shifting of responsibility from my shoulders to the shoulders of people inside the guild.

It's this differentiation between some "better" officer group and the general Lurker group that makes me queasy.  What is your justification for making this seperation?[right][snapback]64280[/snapback][/right]

There is no "better" group here. One has been asked to serve as mentor's, mediators and assist with guild events. The other has been asked to have fun in the game and continue to invite their friends and family as they have always done. There will be some from the latter who are asked to join the former but not as a distinction of "favor" but more to help me with the guild.

I see no difference between these two groups.  Both are new members whose only priviledges are being able to read and write to the guild chat.[right][snapback]64280[/snapback][/right]

There is no distinction between these two but I don't think that Blizzard's in game tools allow me to delete the rank. Or at least the last time I tried it wouldn't. I'll try again tonight since I was successful in deleting the joke rank "Sex Goddess".

Here, I agree strongly with LavCat.  If you feel a person is Lurker material, then that person should be encouraged to look at the website and become members of the forums.  That person should not be recruited into the "guild" first.  Only after the person joins and participates in the forums should they be encouraged to join the "guild."  Members of the "guild" should only be those Lurkers who are known quantities on the site and to a lesser extent close friends and family.  The focus of the Lurker Lounge is the website and forums -- not the individual "guilds" on the individual servers.
[right][snapback]64280[/snapback][/right]

You're sending me a mixed signal here Mongo. You want the emphasis to be upon the site and to keep guild issues seperate. Yet you want these folks to become known quantities on the forums before they can play in the guild. To me this seems like a step in the direction of the LL becoming yet another guild site. My intention with this rank system is handle guild issues on Stormrage in the game rather than on the forums.

Again, my intention with these ranks is not to add additional structure and make things inflexible but to keep the low-key friendly feeling we have shared since Beta while still having the means to protect the interests of the Lounge. The only "power" that was taken away was the ability to promote. If someone is a known quantitiy (say Ghostiger joins us on Stormrage) or a friend of a present Lurker (Roane invites a friend from DAoC) they will be promoted to full member. If someone is only known by a few folk from inside the game then they stay a Lounge Lizard until we know them well enough to promote to full member.

[Tal]

On the other hand, a recruitment conversation should never look like this:

"Lurkers?  What's that?"

"Oh, it's a cool guild.  Want to join?"

[right][snapback]64285[/snapback][/right]

My hope is that Lurkers are not recruiting under those circumstances. My intention would be that if you happen to group frequently with a person, they seem like fun, intelligent folk that an invitation would be extended under those circumstances. For example I invited a neat Role Playing paladin into the guild. She was funny, intelligent, was giving to a fault and would make a fine addition to the guild. Sadly she hasn't been back on since the days of the queue but she's more than welcome back into the Stormrage guild whenever she wishes.

[Treesh]

After giving this some thought, I think the real issue here isn't guild rankings -- it's the issue of recruitment.  As we adventure, we all run into good worthy players whom we feel could be assets to our community.  The question is how do we go about that recruitment process?  My feeling is that the individual "guilds" on the servers are not the correct way to recruit new people.  Instead, new people should be referred to the website and forums, and the "guilds" should only be reserved for those players who have been shown to be members in good standing on the forums.  In other words, a recruitment conversation could look like this:

"Lurkers?  What's that?"

"Oh!  It's a group of us who read the strategy website, The Lurker Lounge.  You should check it out.  http://www.lurkerlounge.com/ "

"Is that a guild?"

"Not really.  It's a website for discussing WoW strategy and is open for everyone.  Some of us decided to make an WoW guild so that we could find each other in-game.  You should check out the site.  It's great!"

"Ah, ok. Cool."
On the other hand, a recruitment conversation should never look like this:

"Lurkers?  What's that?"

"Oh, it's a cool guild.  Want to join?"
To that end, back to the discussion of rankings, I guess the one ranking I don't see a need for is Lounge Lizard.  Basically, if there's a person who we don't know well enough to trust with Lurkers powers, then I'd rather not have that person be in the guild in the first place.  The various Lurker Lounge guilds should only be made up of people whom we know well and trust.
[right][snapback]64285[/snapback][/right]

I wasn't actually discussing us recruiting other people. I was asking about if someone is great and would like to join us and that player asks us to invite him (or her). Now, of course, everyone asking to join isn't going to be invited to join because that's just asking for trouble, but if someone seems to be a genuinely good fit, am I supposed to tell him, "Nope. You have to go visit the site first and become a known member there first before we'll even consider you." I've never had anyone ask "Lurkers? What's that?" or even anything remotely close to that because in game it shows up as a guild. It shows up as a guild tag under the name so the people in game will assume it's a guild. It still comes off as rude and rather silly telling someone as nicely as possible that they can't join because they haven't visited the site yet, and still claim that we aren't an actual guild. And your way still seems cliquish to me. "You're a good person, but you have to endure our trials on the boards before you can become one of us."

[swirly]

My personal feeling is that there should be 3 ranks.

Guild Master: The one in charge of the guild

Lounger: People known to be good for the guild.

Lurker: People who say they are signed up on the forum, but just haven't posted, friends of people, etc etc. Basically anyone questionable.

I think those three ranks should pretty much handle everything. Basically people start out as Lurkers and then when its determined that they are right for the guild they are promoted. Some people may go straight to Lounger too, like if they are already active on the boards.

When you think about it, it really is all in the name of the site...The Lurker Lounge. So what kind of people are here? Well you have people who like to lurk and you have people who like to lounge. Those who like to lurk would be the many people who come to the site to read things. Those who like to lounge would be the many people who come ot the site and actually discuss things. So I think right there you have the groups you need. The core of the site is really imbedded in its name.

The only question that I have right now is about going from lurker to lounger. After typing this I'm thinking that I wouldn't do it like I said about, but rather would do it like this:

Guild Master: The one in charge of the guild

Lounger: People who post in the forums.

Lurker: People who lurk around the site.

A setup like that should pretty much work for everything I think. It even works for finding people in game and adding them to the guild. Like for instance, say you meet somebody in game and play with them for a week or so. You consider them to be the kind of person that we here at the lounge would like. So what do you do? Well you tell them about the site and if they say they will check it out then you can add them as a Lurker. Cause if they are going to check out the site then they will be lurking it basically. Only catch here is that somebody might want to wait a bit after refering them to the site. Tell them about the site, then in a few days after they have checked it out you could add them as a lurker. The wait might be a good idea just to get a feel for if they are going to lurk the site or not.

Anyway, I think those three groups solve all the problems. Of course there is one thing to consider. Mongo's Vision states that guilds are basically up to those who feel like messing with them in game. So basically with that Vision it means you can make the guild however you want to make it. It doesn't have to be how Mongo thinks a guild should be. He has already said that the Lounge itself is hands off with the guild. So if you want to make a guild with alot of ranks and that adds new people to it in the game without them being active on the site, then you can do that. The only stipulation in the Vision is quality of play really. So as long as the people who you add to the guild are up to the Lounge's level of play, then it would seem that you are free to add them. Personally I prefer the 3 ranks I said above, but according to the Vision you can do as you wish with it. : )

[Tal]

My personal feeling is that there should be 3 ranks.

Guild Master: The one in charge of the guild

Lounger: People known to be good for the guild.

Lurker: People who say they are signed up on the forum, but just haven't posted, friends of people, etc etc.  Basically anyone questionable.

I think those three ranks should pretty much handle everything.  Basically people start out as Lurkers and then when its determined that they are right for the guild they are promoted.  Some people may go straight to Lounger too, like if they are already active on the boards.[right][snapback]64292[/snapback][/right]

This would actually be more restrictive than our current system. Under the current system a person who posts on the boards or is a friend of a Lurker (ie someone who you've played with for some time and can trust) is automatically promoted to Lurker. Those who are unknown quantities (ie someone who just joined the site or is someone grouped with quite a few times in game and may be suitable) remain in the trial phase until they are known quantities.

When you think about it, it really is all in the name of the site...The Lurker Lounge.  So what kind of people are here?  Well you have people who like to lurk and you have people who like to lounge.  Those who like to lurk would be the many people who come to the site to read things.  Those who like to lounge would be the many people who come ot the site and actually discuss things.  So I think right there you have the groups you need.  The core of the site is really imbedded in its name.[right][snapback]64292[/snapback][/right]

There are folks regularly that post and ask for maphack but since tehy read the site you'd have me invite them into the guild. Thats counter intuitive to what the Lurker Lounge really is. The Lurkers on Stormrage is a collection of friends who embody what the Lounge is about: discovering the mechanics and strategies of the game while having fun and playing honorably. (legit)

The only question that I have right now is about going from lurker to lounger.  After typing this I'm thinking that I wouldn't do it like I said about, but rather would do it like this:

Guild Master: The one in charge of the guild

Lounger: People who post in the forums.

Lurker: People who lurk around the site.[right][snapback]64292[/snapback][/right]

And how is the fact that they lurk around the site an indicator of whether we would want to play with the game?

A setup like that should pretty much work for everything I think.  It even works for finding people in game and adding them to the guild.  Like for instance, say you meet somebody in game and play with them for a week or so.  You consider them to be the kind of person that we here at the lounge would like.  So what do you do?  Well you tell them about the site and if they say they will check it out then you can add them as a Lurker.  Cause if they are going to check out the site then they will be lurking it basically.  Only catch here is that somebody might want to wait a bit after refering them to the site.  Tell them about the site, then in a few days after they have checked it out you could add them as a lurker.  The wait might be a good idea just to get a feel for if they are going to lurk the site or not.[right][snapback]64292[/snapback][/right]

This would do nothing to eliminate the problem behavior already encountered and that I am trying to avoid in the future. Membership of a forum does not a lurker make in my mind.

Anyway, I think those three groups solve all the problems.  Of course there is one thing to consider.  Mongo's Vision states that guilds are basically up to those who feel like messing with them in game.  So basically with that Vision it means you can make the guild however you want to make it.  It doesn't have to be how Mongo thinks a guild should be.  He has already said that the Lounge itself is hands off with the guild.  So if you want to make a guild with alot of ranks and that adds new people to it in the game without them being active on the site, then you can do that.  The only stipulation in the Vision is quality of play really.  So as long as the people who you add to the guild are up to the Lounge's level of play, then it would seem that you are free to add them.  Personally I prefer the 3 ranks I said above, but according to the Vision you can do as you wish with it. : )
[right][snapback]64292[/snapback][/right]

While Mongo did state that we could do as we will with the Guilds in game I still run these kinds of things past him not because "him big chief" but because I respect his opinion.

[swirly]

This would do nothing to eliminate the problem behavior already encountered

Why don't you write up what problem behavior has been encountered so far? It could be helpful for anyone posting in this thread to see what issues have already come up. Its kind of like in the many debate threads that have happened around here in the past. Eventually somebody breaks down and posts a definition of some word that is central to the debate. So basically I'm asking you to define what the problem behavior is that has been encountered. I'll go farther though and ask you to define the problem behavior you expect to encounter in the future as well. I think having these things defined will help alot in the discussion.

edit: corrected a word

[MongoJerry]

Maybe I'm just dense, but don't these two statements slightly contradict one another?

Not really. Within the "guilds," there should be little or no seperation between the players, because all players within the "guilds" should be trusted to begin with. The in-game "guilds" should not be the means by which we recruit new people. People in these "guilds" are walking advertisements for the Lurker Lounge, so those wearing the banner of the Lurker Lounge should already be known quantities. We should not need an in-game initiation process, since that vetting should have happened before the person was invited into the "guild."

When would you consider new people a known quantity on the site?  Only those who post frequently and well thought out posts to boot?  What about those who don't care to post a lot, but love to lurk and read and are great in game? How will they become known enough to "allow" into the guild?

It's one of those "you know it when you see it" things. Basically, if you feel you can trust that the person can be trusted with the responsibilities of being a "Lurkers" person, then they should be allowed to join. If one doesn't trust the person enough to do that, then they shouldn't be invited. If Tal feels that a subset of people in the guild are best able to judge who can be so trusted, then I'll be willing to go along with that.

The new person sees lurkers helping other people (or is helped himself) frequently, parties with lurkers a few times, is a great player, asks to join but is turned down and told to go to a webpage and post before being considered?

The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.
The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.
The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.
The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.
The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.
The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.
The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.
The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.

There is no right or priviledge to being in a Lurker Lounge in-game "guild." There is, however, a responsibility that comes with being a part of a Lurker Lounge in-game "guild" in that one becomes a walking advertisement for the website, The Lurker Lounge. As the designated WoW site administrator for the Lurker Lounge, I feel that it is reasonable to ask that those who advertise and represent the Lurker Lounge in-game be active members of the Lurker Lounge -- whether by being active posters or by just being active readers of the site. You seem caught in a guild mentality, which is likely where your confusion comes from, so let me use the Amazon Basin (guild website) vs Lurker Lounge (non-guild strategy website) comparison:

Amazon Basin: The focus is on the in-game guilds -- membership of those guilds, interaction within those guilds, and events planned within those guilds. The website is designed to support and foster better communication within those in-game guilds.

Lurker Lounge: The focus is on the website and forums -- the strategy guides, game news, game formulae, general venting and game discussion. The in-game "guilds" are designed to support the website in that they help people who come to the website and forums find each other in-game.

So, the answer to your question of what to do if you find a great player you enjoy partying with is to do what I do: Add that person to your friends list, and invite that person to group with you often. My friends list is filled with people like this. It has to be, since Bolty scared off most Lurkers from trying out the PvP server (j/k). You can even let that person know about this great site called the Lurker Lounge that you love so much that you walk around with a banner over your head proclaiming your fondness for it.

But it would be wholely inappropriate to have a person who is not in any way participating in the Lurker Lounge -- even by just being a passive Lurker -- to walk around with that same banner over his or her head. It's not a matter of being snobby. In fact, I strongly encourage all Lurkers to branch out and meet new people. I wish well on all those who join official guilds, and I frequently repeat the mantra that we welcome players of all guilds to join in the discussion here. However, I do not feel that it is appropriate for a person to represent the Lurker Lounge in-game, when the person is not in fact not a member or participant of the Lurker Lounge.

[Tal]

Why don't you write up what problem behavior has been encountered so far?  It could be helpful for anyone posting in this thread to see what issues have already come up.  Its kind of like in the many debate threads that have happened around here in the past.  Eventually somebody breaks down and posts a definition of some word that is central to the debate.  So basically I'm asking you to define what the problem behavior is that has been encountered.  I'll go farther though and ask you to define the problem behavior you expect to encounter in the future as well.  I think having these things defined will help alot in the discussion.

edit: corrected a word
[right][snapback]64295[/snapback][/right]

I will not be naming names but there are two incidents that I can safely relate.

First I was contacted by the Guild Master of another guild because someone recruited by one of our members was kill stealing another alliance player and stole a chest that that person was working towards. I was lucky enough to talk to the people grouped with the victim (both who were not members of the victim's guild) and they described the behavior or our "Lurker". I talked to these people at different times and am reasonably certain that the incident occurred just as described. Unfortunately I never got the story of our recruit because he quit the guild at some point before I was online with him again.

Second story involved another lurker looting a blue item that I had won in a /random that he/she had also /randomed on. I could have believed the person's claims of not understanding Bind on Pickup if I hadn't explained prior to relinquishing control of the body to do the random. Granted I probably should have had the loot setting on group but I didn't think I needed to do this with Lurkers and friends of Lurkers. the person in question had also quit the guild at some point before I could talk with them about the incident.

These are just two of the incidents that lead me to make this decision. They are not the only two that I experienced, just the ones I feel most comfortable relating.

[Occhidiangela]

*snip*
1.  There is, however, a responsibility that comes with being a part of a Lurker Lounge in-game "guild" in that one becomes a walking advertisement for the website, The Lurker Lounge.  As the designated WoW site administrator for the Lurker Lounge, I feel that it is reasonable to ask that those who advertise and represent the Lurker Lounge in-game be active members of the Lurker Lounge -- whether by being active posters or by just being active readers of the site.
*snip*
2.  The in-game "guilds" are designed to support the website in that they help people who come to the website and forums find each other in-game.  It has to be, since Bolty scared off most Lurkers from trying out the PvP server (j/k). 
*snip*
3.  I do not feel that it is appropriate for a person to represent the Lurker Lounge in-game, when the person is not in fact not a member of the Lurker Lounge.
[right][snapback]64296[/snapback][/right]

Point 1. Very well put as the guiding principle behind what being a Lurker entails.
Point 2. I am trolling around on Tichondrius, just don't play much. Horde Troll Hunter.
Point 3. Amen, Deacon.

Occhi

[MongoJerry]

While Mongo did state that we could do as we will with the Guilds in game I still run these kinds of things past him not because "him big chief" but because I respect his opinion.

Thanks, Tal. You're awesome. I want you to know that, and I want to publicly acknowledge how great your help has been. However, I would like to clarify this point by quoting from the "Vision for the Lurker Lounge: World of Warcraft" post:

The Lurker Lounge "Guild": The Lurker Lounge is not a guild. Lurkers are free to and even encouraged to find and join guilds on the servers they happen to play on. However, there are many players who come to this site who do not have any affiliation with a guild and would like to play with fellow Lurkers. For these cases, we will provide a list of servers that have a higher than usual number of Lurkers playing on them. If a server has enough Lurkers playing on it, the players on that server are welcome to form a Lurker Lounge guild in order to enable better communication between the those players. The administration of these "guilds," including minutia like tabard design, are up to the players on the individual server.

Generally, I prefer a "hands-off" policy on guild issues. However, since characters in a Lurker Lounge guild will be walking advertisements for the Lurker Lounge, I would expect gameplay from anyone creating or participating in such a guild to reflect the higher standards of the Lurker Lounge community. I will provide a separate small list of Lurker Lounge behavior guidelines later, but that'll be about it for the Lurker Lounge "guild." If you would like something with more stringent behavior guidelines and more built-in safeguards, then I suggest looking into joining the Amazon Basin guild. The AB already has a history of organizing and maintaining fun and safe guilds to play in, and it seems silly to duplicate their efforts.

This is not the same as letting people do whatever they will with the in-game Lurker guilds. If someone were to start a kill-on-sight or hacker guild called the Lurker Lounge, I'd certainly be upset. And in this less extreme case, while I would prefer a "hands-off" policy on minutia like tabbard design and the discipline of individual players, I feel that it is important that I weigh in on this overall policy discussion on the recruitment of new players, since it does impact the way that other players will perceive the site.

[Tal]

Not really.  Within the "guilds," there should be little or no seperation between the players, because all players within the "guilds" should be trusted to begin with.  The in-game "guilds" should not be the means by which we recruit new people.  People in these "guilds" are walking advertisements for the Lurker Lounge, so those wearing the banner of the Lurker Lounge should already be known quantities.  We should not need an in-game initiation process, since that vetting should have happened before the person was invited into the "guild."[right][snapback]64296[/snapback][/right]

This would cut 90% of the Stormrage guild population as folks have invited family and friends to join. For the most part these people are great and welcome additions to the guild. But by the same token we have some folk who post on the lounge that I wouldn't necessarily say are good "Lurkers". They don't exhibit the spirit of fun-loving, sharing, legit and honorable play that exists in the Stormrage Guild. I'd much rather folks feel comfortable inviting their friends to the Guild and encouraging them to read the forums than make it a requirement. My way seems less restrictive than yours in this case.

It's one of those "you know it when you see it" things.  Basically, if you feel you can trust that the person can be trusted with the responsibilities of being a "Lurkers" person, then they should be allowed to join.  If one doesn't trust the person enough to do that, then they shouldn't be invited.  If Tal feels that a subset of people in the guild are best able to judge who can be so trusted, then I'll be willing to go along with that.[right][snapback]64296[/snapback][/right]

This is moving far beyond my thoughts on these ranks. Lurkers are presently trusted to invite friends and family and folk they think would make fine additions to the guild. Our "officers" are intended to be mentors on how the game is played, assist if there are disputes between Lurker members, and help set up Guild Events. They also may promote unknowns to full members if they feel that the person has proven to be "Lurker" material. It would be great to remain as we were in Beta, just folks from the Lounge meeting in game for fun, but reality has intervened and we need to be proactive to retain our reputation as a fun, legit, group of good players.

The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.[right][snapback]64296[/snapback][/right]

No but its members have formed a guild on Stormrage and have invited their friends. Asking someone to post regularly on the boards as a vetting process just adds noise to the signal in my opinion. We have quite a few folk who play regularly in the guild that have been long time lurkers with a handful of posts to their name. We have some Lurkers who read the site now that they know of its existence who never (or very infrequently) post. We're losing sight of what the "Lurker" part of the name means in this discussion.

There is no right or priviledge to being in a Lurker Lounge in-game "guild."  There is, however, a responsibility that comes with being a part of a Lurker Lounge in-game "guild" in that one becomes a walking advertisement for the website, The Lurker Lounge.  As the designated WoW site administrator for the Lurker Lounge, I feel that it is reasonable to ask that those who advertise and represent the Lurker Lounge in-game be active members of the Lurker Lounge -- whether by being active posters or by just being active readers of the site.  You seem caught in a guild mentality, which is likely where your confusion comes from, so let me use the Amazon Basin (guild website) vs Lurker Lounge (non-guild strategy website) comparison:

Amazon Basin:  The focus is on the in-game guilds -- membership of those guilds, interaction within those guilds, and events planned within those guilds.  The website is designed to support and foster better communication within those in-game guilds.

Lurker Lounge:  The focus is on the website and forums -- the strategy guides, game news, game formulae, general venting and game discussion.  The in-game "guilds" are designed to support the website in that they help people who come to the website and forums find each other in-game.[right][snapback]64296[/snapback][/right]

It is very difficult to determine if someone is reading the site on a regular basis and I 'd rather stay away from the idea of letting someone be a walking advertisement for the Lurker Lounge based on the fact that they have registered for an account. After all we still have folks who register simply to ask for maphack, make trade threads or post pictures of Tub Girl. I also don't want some of our folk to leave because their friends don't post on the lounge and therefore are not able to be part of the guild. My reason for these changes is precisely to maintain the standards of the Lounge without making the Lurker Lounge a guild website.

So, the answer to your question of what to do if you find a great player you enjoy partying with is to do what I do:  Add that person to your friends list, and invite that person to group with you often.  My friends list is filled with people like this.  It has to be, since Bolty scared off most Lurkers from trying out the PvP server (j/k).  You can even let that person know about this great site called the Lurker Lounge that you love so much that you walk around with a banner over your head proclaiming your fondness for it.[right][snapback]64296[/snapback][/right]

My friends list is also full of good folk that I have grouped with. Only a few have I grouped with often enough to make me consider extending an invite to them. Asking them to read the Lurker Lounge prior to being guilded seems coutner productive to the idea of the Lurker Lounge being more than a guild website. I'd much rather point them to the site while making them a Lounge Lizard and encouraging them to post strategies, questions, game findings here.

But it would be wholely inappropriate to have a person who is not in any way participating in the Lurker Lounge -- even by just being a passive Lurker -- to walk around with that same banner over his or her head.  It's not a matter of being snobby.  In fact, I strongly encourage all Lurkers to branch out and meet new people.  I wish well on all those who join official guilds, and I frequently repeat the mantra that we welcome players of all guilds to join in the discussion here.  However, I do not feel that it is appropriate for a person to represent the Lurker Lounge in-game, when the person is not in fact not a member or participant of the Lurker Lounge.
[right][snapback]64296[/snapback][/right]

If we followed these statements I would have to turn out a majority of the Guild. I'd rather keep to the present means by playing with these folk and encouraging them to read and post on the forums. My intentions with my "changes" is to preserve the idea that the Lurker Lounge is not a guild but still allowing folks to represent the Lounge in game through honorable play thereby bringing more people to the site to read strategy, game mechanics, etc.

[Treesh]

Not really.  Within the "guilds," there should be little or no seperation between the players, because all players within the "guilds" should be trusted to begin with.  The in-game "guilds" should not be the means by which we recruit new people.  People in these "guilds" are walking advertisements for the Lurker Lounge, so those wearing the banner of the Lurker Lounge should already be known quantities.  We should not need an in-game initiation process, since that vetting should have happened before the person was invited into the "guild."

That's why I said slightly contradictory. ;) It wasn't a sarcastic "slightly".

*devil's advocate*
Wait, you want us to be walking advertisements for the lurker lounge, but you don't want it to be a way to get new people for the site? Advertising means trying to get your name out there to be recognized. Recognition usually leads to more people joining the lounge (not just the ingame guild).

The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.
The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.
The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.
The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.
The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.
The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.
The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.
The Lurker Lounge is not a guild.

Again, my point is that while we view it as "not a guild", the people in game may not understand it and brush us off as being rude and cliquish or may view the webpage as a right of passage rather than the main focus because they don't quite get it. Although with the discussions people have been having in this thread, they'll probably get it soon enough. ;)

There is no right or priviledge to being in a Lurker Lounge in-game "guild."  There is, however, a responsibility that comes with being a part of a Lurker Lounge in-game "guild" in that one becomes a walking advertisement for the website, The Lurker Lounge.  As the designated WoW site administrator for the Lurker Lounge, I feel that it is reasonable to ask that those who advertise and represent the Lurker Lounge in-game be active members of the Lurker Lounge -- whether by being active posters or by just being active readers of the site.

That is reasonable, and I don't think tal's rankings interfere with that. With the rankings in place, if there is trouble with those on probation, he can point to that and say they were on probation and therefore not representative of the Lounge so it still maintains the quality rep that the Lounge has in internet circles.

You seem caught in a guild mentality, which is likely where your confusion comes from, so let me use the Amazon Basin (guild website) vs Lurker Lounge (non-guild strategy website) comparison:

Amazon Basin:  The focus is on the in-game guilds -- membership of those guilds, interaction within those guilds, and events planned within those guilds.  The website is designed to support and foster better communication within those in-game guilds.

Lurker Lounge:  The focus is on the website and forums -- the strategy guides, game news, game formulae, general venting and game discussion.  The in-game "guilds" are designed to support the website in that they help people who come to the website and forums find each other in-game.

So, the answer to your question of what to do if you find a great player you enjoy partying with is to do what I do:  Add that person to your friends list, and invite that person to group with you often.  My friends list is filled with people like this.  It has to be, since Bolty scared off most Lurkers from trying out the PvP server (j/k).  You can even let that person know about this great site called the Lurker Lounge that you love so much that you walk around with a banner over your head proclaiming your fondness for it.

I'm looking at it how others in the game and who have never even heard of the Lounge may look at it. It helps to try to view things from others' perspectives.

And I do frequently add people to my friends list, I have never invited anyone into the guild, no matter how great they were to group with multiple times. I doubt I will ever invite anyone into the guild simply because I don't want to subject them to the forums who are still somewhat hostile (not a lot) to new people. I will continue to strive to be courteous (except to people who have been given a fair chance to be a decent person, but are still just absolute monkeys who should never be allowed into polite company), helpful, and as knowledgeable as I can be so I don't besmirch the Lounge rep, but I'm not going to subject them to posting here. I guess what I am really asking is how can you know if they are reading the boards actively, but just not posting? You don't have to register to view the boards (and forcing registration in order to view threads would be a horrible idea) and you can't compare IP addresses between here and the game. Someone could be knowledgeable and helpful, but not post and not register here, but read everything on the site and forums. Do we snub those people as well unless they are name-droppers? Just about any monkey online can name some GoLs, but that's no assurance that they visit the site regularly.

But it would be wholely inappropriate to have a person who is not in any way participating in the Lurker Lounge -- even by just being a passive Lurker -- to walk around with that same banner over his or her head.  It's not a matter of being snobby.  In fact, I strongly encourage all Lurkers to branch out and meet new people.  I wish well on all those who join official guilds, and I frequently repeat the mantra that we welcome players of all guilds to join in the discussion here.  However, I do not feel that it is appropriate for a person to represent the Lurker Lounge in-game, when the person is not in fact not a member or participant of the Lurker Lounge.
[right][snapback]64296[/snapback][/right]

That is understandable as well and I do not have a real problem with it. I'm just trying to make sure you realize how others may view us, which doesn't really matter in the end, but it can cause confusion for those who don't know the Lounge. I'm also worried about how people can claim to be a member or participant of the Lounge if they aren't the type who like to post on boards. That's my only true concern. Everything else is just fluff. There are those who are Lurker material, much more than I am, who don't post and a "you know it when you see it" doesn't always work since we've already had complaints about guildies' behavior using that.