Great ideas, Carthorinn! Hopefully, they put in a little work and make most of them (or all) happen! But, they left the guild management system completely untouched until now.....and instead of improving it, they gutted it.
Hopefully they actually see how important all of this is to us, and realize the system needs IMPROVING, not removing!
07/27/2018 03:14 AMPosted by DynaraGreat ideas, Carthorinn! Hopefully, they put in a little work and make most of them (or all) happen! But, they left the guild management system completely untouched until now.....and instead of improving it, they gutted it.
Hopefully they actually see how important all of this is to us, and realize the system needs IMPROVING, not removing!
At the end of the day they need to realize the main priority is what their customer base considers the priority
I think Carthorinn has pointed out some good suggestions. In Addition to making guild tools and permissions more powerful, I think it would be cool to see tighter integration with the communities features too.
I think each guild should be able to create a single 'guild-linked' community. From the guild end of things, players in that community would show in the guild roster and show a separate 'community' rank. That rank would have access to guild chat with the option of being muted like any other rank, optional access view the guild calendar events, and likely no bank access (that should be a privilege for full membership.) Obviously, this would be an optional feature that Guild Leads can use, and inviting people to the guild-linked community would be an additional permissions node for ranks, so that guild leaders can choose what ranks, be it everyone, or officers, or anywhere in between, have the ability to invite to the guild-linked community.
The separate ranks for communities, Member, Mod, Lead can and should still be utilized within the community. The Guild Master of the guild the community is linked to would have 'ownership' rights in the community.
What this would achieve is a way for players to have 'try-before-you-buy' membership experience to a guild. Currently, if I want to invite somebody from another guild who might be looking for a change of pace, they'd need to spend time on an alt in our guild. The logistics of doing that aren't always friendly. For example, a player on the other faction or on another realm would likely need to roll an entire new character to experience even chat with the guild, or they'd need to buy a character service and leave their current server behind, if they're the type of player who really only plays one character. The other benefit to this is that it can effectively act as a second guild membership. This builds everyone's ability to form community, in and out of guild, and basically allows guilds to have honorary members who either don't have the means or for other reasons cannot leave their current group or realm without social penalties.
Currently, addons like Greenwall and Guild-to-guild try to do similar things, and really I see no reason why Guilds and Communities can't benefit from each other and live in harmony rather than being quite segregated as they are. Basically communities now are just custom chat channels with a new UI, and some features like basic ranks.
Keep the train rolling folks. I think there's some good ideas around here.
I think each guild should be able to create a single 'guild-linked' community. From the guild end of things, players in that community would show in the guild roster and show a separate 'community' rank. That rank would have access to guild chat with the option of being muted like any other rank, optional access view the guild calendar events, and likely no bank access (that should be a privilege for full membership.) Obviously, this would be an optional feature that Guild Leads can use, and inviting people to the guild-linked community would be an additional permissions node for ranks, so that guild leaders can choose what ranks, be it everyone, or officers, or anywhere in between, have the ability to invite to the guild-linked community.
The separate ranks for communities, Member, Mod, Lead can and should still be utilized within the community. The Guild Master of the guild the community is linked to would have 'ownership' rights in the community.
What this would achieve is a way for players to have 'try-before-you-buy' membership experience to a guild. Currently, if I want to invite somebody from another guild who might be looking for a change of pace, they'd need to spend time on an alt in our guild. The logistics of doing that aren't always friendly. For example, a player on the other faction or on another realm would likely need to roll an entire new character to experience even chat with the guild, or they'd need to buy a character service and leave their current server behind, if they're the type of player who really only plays one character. The other benefit to this is that it can effectively act as a second guild membership. This builds everyone's ability to form community, in and out of guild, and basically allows guilds to have honorary members who either don't have the means or for other reasons cannot leave their current group or realm without social penalties.
Currently, addons like Greenwall and Guild-to-guild try to do similar things, and really I see no reason why Guilds and Communities can't benefit from each other and live in harmony rather than being quite segregated as they are. Basically communities now are just custom chat channels with a new UI, and some features like basic ranks.
Keep the train rolling folks. I think there's some good ideas around here.
07/27/2018 04:09 AMPosted by HathloI think Carthorinn has pointed out some good suggestions. In Addition to making guild tools and permissions more powerful, I think it would be cool to see tighter integration with the communities features too.
I think each guild should be able to create a single 'guild-linked' community. From the guild end of things, players in that community would show in the guild roster and show a separate 'community' rank. That rank would have access to guild chat with the option of being muted like any other rank, optional access view the guild calendar events, and likely no bank access (that should be a privilege for full membership.) Obviously, this would be an optional feature that Guild Leads can use, and inviting people to the guild-linked community would be an additional permissions node for ranks, so that guild leaders can choose what ranks, be it everyone, or officers, or anywhere in between, have the ability to invite to the guild-linked community.
The separate ranks for communities, Member, Mod, Lead can and should still be utilized within the community. The Guild Master of the guild the community is linked to would have 'ownership' rights in the community.
What this would achieve is a way for players to have 'try-before-you-buy' membership experience to a guild. Currently, if I want to invite somebody from another guild who might be looking for a change of pace, they'd need to spend time on an alt in our guild. The logistics of doing that aren't always friendly. For example, a player on the other faction or on another realm would likely need to roll an entire new character to experience even chat with the guild.
Currently, addons like Greenwall and Guild-to-guild try to do similar things, and really I see no reason why Guilds and Communities can't benefit from each other and live in harmony rather than being quite segregated as they are. Basically communities now are just custom chat channels with a new UI, and some features like basic ranks.
Keep the train rolling folks. I think there's some good ideas around here.
Yeah it would be nice for use to link "sister guilds" on another server. Where we can run content together and both guilds can get credit for it. But in a semi community format. Not to erase guild controls though. That is what scares me is maintaining guild solidity while trying to run your guild in one way and the community in another way. I think they just need to bite the bullet and lift server restrictions on guilds and let us invite who we want to it. The time has come. I did not realize the legion slogan of "you are not prepared" was referring to this patch for 2 years LOL
And also I think both GM's should have ownership rights if that were a thing.
07/27/2018 04:12 AMPosted by CarthorinnI think Carthorinn has pointed out some good suggestions. In Addition to making guild tools and permissions more powerful, I think it would be cool to see tighter integration with the communities features too.
I think each guild should be able to create a single 'guild-linked' community. From the guild end of things, players in that community would show in the guild roster and show a separate 'community' rank. That rank would have access to guild chat with the option of being muted like any other rank, optional access view the guild calendar events, and likely no bank access (that should be a privilege for full membership.) Obviously, this would be an optional feature that Guild Leads can use, and inviting people to the guild-linked community would be an additional permissions node for ranks, so that guild leaders can choose what ranks, be it everyone, or officers, or anywhere in between, have the ability to invite to the guild-linked community.
The separate ranks for communities, Member, Mod, Lead can and should still be utilized within the community. The Guild Master of the guild the community is linked to would have 'ownership' rights in the community.
What this would achieve is a way for players to have 'try-before-you-buy' membership experience to a guild. Currently, if I want to invite somebody from another guild who might be looking for a change of pace, they'd need to spend time on an alt in our guild. The logistics of doing that aren't always friendly. For example, a player on the other faction or on another realm would likely need to roll an entire new character to experience even chat with the guild.
Currently, addons like Greenwall and Guild-to-guild try to do similar things, and really I see no reason why Guilds and Communities can't benefit from each other and live in harmony rather than being quite segregated as they are. Basically communities now are just custom chat channels with a new UI, and some features like basic ranks.
Keep the train rolling folks. I think there's some good ideas around here.
Yeah it would be nice for use to link "sister guilds" on another server. Where we can run content together and both guilds can get credit for it. But in a semi community format. Not to erase guild controls though. That is what scares me is maintaining guild solidity while trying to run your guild in one way and the community in another way. I think they just need to bite the bullet and lift server restrictions on guilds and let us invite who we want to it. The time has come. I did not realize the legion slogan of "you are not prepared" was referring to this patch for 2 years LOL
This would be a FANTASTIC thing....considering my "guild" is on 10 separate servers. If they had a combined system other than using the same discord, I would be thrilled!
Well most of the time I fill my raid gaps its with several members of another guild. It would be cool to be able to have them officially linked together.
Don't really have anything new to contribute but I wanted to add my voice in support of bringing back the old controls at the very least, if not improving them.
There's no rhyme or reason to this and it seems like just another arbitrary removal of player choice. You can't even make the argument that this is meant to make things easier and less complicated for new people since GM's are typically more likely to be the type of player who is more experienced and knowledgeable about the game and willing to put extra time into learning how to use advanced features such as guild rank management.
It really makes me think that Guilds have been straight up converted to Communities-with-a-couple-extra-features behind the scenes. Nobody was asking for the Communities feature, and while it is certainly a good addition to the game and something nice to have, it shouldn't come at the cost of a system that was already in place and had been working perfectly fine for the last 14 years.
There's no rhyme or reason to this and it seems like just another arbitrary removal of player choice. You can't even make the argument that this is meant to make things easier and less complicated for new people since GM's are typically more likely to be the type of player who is more experienced and knowledgeable about the game and willing to put extra time into learning how to use advanced features such as guild rank management.
It really makes me think that Guilds have been straight up converted to Communities-with-a-couple-extra-features behind the scenes. Nobody was asking for the Communities feature, and while it is certainly a good addition to the game and something nice to have, it shouldn't come at the cost of a system that was already in place and had been working perfectly fine for the last 14 years.
All of these great "suggestions" keep undermining the whole point of this thread...
Please FOCUS.
Bring back the original permissions setup, the current setup does not allow us to maintain and work as traditional guilds which use tiered based rewards and have fine control over who can do what in guild.
I respect everyone who has put forth ideas but unless the main problem is fixed none of those ideas will actually help the situation we are in.
The fact that the current Community UI is smashed into the Guiid UI like an undead abomination that it is well it just makes this whole thing harder.
So again to point out the main issues:
1. Bring back the original permission setup.
2. Bring back the original Guild Roster 1 button solution.
This will fix 90% of the complaints in this thread.
Please FOCUS.
Bring back the original permissions setup, the current setup does not allow us to maintain and work as traditional guilds which use tiered based rewards and have fine control over who can do what in guild.
I respect everyone who has put forth ideas but unless the main problem is fixed none of those ideas will actually help the situation we are in.
The fact that the current Community UI is smashed into the Guiid UI like an undead abomination that it is well it just makes this whole thing harder.
So again to point out the main issues:
1. Bring back the original permission setup.
2. Bring back the original Guild Roster 1 button solution.
This will fix 90% of the complaints in this thread.
All of these great "suggestions" keep undermining the whole point of this thread...Quoting for visibility.
Please FOCUS.
1. Bring back the original permission setup.
2. Bring back the original Guild Roster 1 button solution.
This will fix 90% of the complaints in this thread.
Forever trying to figure out why the hell a Blue would post saying he extended the pages and not give any feedback to our feedback or reasons behind why they did it... seriously?
07/27/2018 06:49 AMPosted by PolgaraAll of these great "suggestions" keep undermining the whole point of this thread...Quoting for visibility.
Please FOCUS.
1. Bring back the original permission setup.
2. Bring back the original Guild Roster 1 button solution.
This will fix 90% of the complaints in this thread.
07/27/2018 02:40 AMPosted by FelglaiveThat is idiotic. I guess the person who made those changes (and the boss that approved it) has zero background in information security
I'm pretty certain the person who made these changes, along with the boss who approved it, doesn't play WoW.
lift server restrictions on guilds and let us invite who we want to it. The time has come.
This so much this.......
What is going on with guild chat settings? I keep trying to find them and nothing - the only people who can chat are officers. Who can do everything...
They really need to fix this quickly. As the only options now are officer with access to everything or non-officer who can't do anything.
They really need to fix this quickly. As the only options now are officer with access to everything or non-officer who can't do anything.
07/27/2018 06:46 AMPosted by GreenstoneAll of these great "suggestions" keep undermining the whole point of this thread...
Please FOCUS.
Bring back the original permissions setup, the current setup does not allow us to maintain and work as traditional guilds which use tiered based rewards and have fine control over who can do what in guild.
I respect everyone who has put forth ideas but unless the main problem is fixed none of those ideas will actually help the situation we are in.
The fact that the current Community UI is smashed into the Guiid UI like an undead abomination that it is well it just makes this whole thing harder.
So again to point out the main issues:
1. Bring back the original permission setup.
2. Bring back the original Guild Roster 1 button solution.
This will fix 90% of the complaints in this thread.
If we have the opportunity to make the system and the game better we should take it the old system was flawed.... We are just trying to move forward so please don't get disrespectful and minimize our dedication to this cause. I am sorry that you feel we are bombing the thread trying to make suggestions but when they read through this they may start working on improvements for the greater good. Restoring the old way is a band-aid in my opinion.
Please consider this. The new way permissions are laid out takes choice away from the players, and doesn't offer us anything in return. It is less intuitive, less functional, and feels like a regression.
I know it was probably done related to communities, but this just feels like another spit in the face to guilds, whose functionality you've given to communities, and you've given us no way to distinguish ourselves from them except green text.
I know it was probably done related to communities, but this just feels like another spit in the face to guilds, whose functionality you've given to communities, and you've given us no way to distinguish ourselves from them except green text.
07/27/2018 06:50 AMPosted by KanstilxdForever trying to figure out why the hell a Blue would post saying he extended the pages and not give any feedback to our feedback or reasons behind why they did it... seriously?
Well if you had scrolled through the thread you would see where I said .... He is basically a forum monitor. He cannot give you an answer he doesn't even have. He can simply pass this thread on to the right people and even than it going to take a while for them to answer. I don't want them rushing to answer us and promise something they can't implement. I rather they take time to read through this thread to see what people want... This is exactly what we don't need in this thread. Please stop bashing blues and make suggestions.
07/27/2018 06:46 AMPosted by GreenstoneSo again to point out the main issues:
1. Bring back the original permission setup.
2. Bring back the original Guild Roster 1 button solution.
This will fix 90% of the complaints in this thread.
07/26/2018 05:09 PMPosted by Stealthpanda07/24/2018 05:39 PMPosted by GruuhrAlso, guild chat hangs around forever. New guild members can see what was posted in guild chat prior to them joining. Also, officers can view messages posted in officer chat prior to their promotion.
This is not a good idea.
Tell me why that isn't a good idea? If they have access to that chat then there shouldn't be a problem unless you're talking crap about someone behind their back and don't want them to see it.
Here is why:
1. Information is valuable and it is perishable. Keeping information around past its retention schedule is a lot like drinking milk from a jug that's two weeks past its best if used by date or eating raw eggs that have exceeded their use by date. Its a crap shoot. Only with milk and eggs you get warning signs that the milk has gone sour or the eggs have turned rotten by their smell. With information there isn't a warning sign on "expired" data until you act on it and get results from that action. With milk or eggs that have gone bad you can generally reject it before it gets so far into your system as to cause permanent damage. With information that you or others act on that has "expired" there is no way to prevent the expired data from getting far enough into the "system" to cause harm.
2. Information has meaning and sometimes that meaning will do harm to yourself or others. Think about information like a stock tip. It has a shelf life someone tosses out a direction (buy sell hold sell short) a stock (e.g. ATVI) and a number of shares or blocks of shares along with a target price. That information is probably only good for a day or less. Someone not privy to the original conversation picks up the scrap of paper the tip is written on three months after it was written and acts on it. The tip had originator and marketer on it (originator is the one who actions the information, marketer is the one who provided the tip) You sell ATVI short (thats the direction thats given) for 1000 shares at a target of $60.00 (the current ATVI stock price is $76.98 per share. 3 months ago that target would probably have been closer to the target ($66.53 per share) so when that tip was good you were a lot closer to being in the money on a short sell. You buy to cover (you have to cover all of your transactions so buying to cover would be the same thing as selling a long position except its inverted (on a short sell you start out with no stock and your gambling the price will go down and you can then buy to cover making a profit on the sale and ending up owning the stock at a lower price)) at todays target you would lose $16.98 per share (you bought to cover at current price and the 'future' you sold short now has a debt attached to it). At a thousand shares you just lost $16,450.00 because you acted on information that was badly out of date.
Now you know who the originator of the tip is and the marketer so you sue them for allowing you to come into contact with information that was past its shelf life and harmful to you (even though you acted on the information that was out of date, legally you should never have been exposed to it because both the originator and the marketer (booking agent) knew or should have known that the tip was at the very least restricted information and should have destroyed that information when it had expired.
Three people were harmed by that information which at the time it was given had you done as the tip directed you would have increased your wealth because the target would have gone "in the money" (another way of saying the stock price fell below the target price). Two of those people may now be liable for SEC violations (originator and marketer), while a third will be lest trustworthy in the eyes of their financial peers.
So we have in one transaction compliance risk (originator and marketer had company policies they were bound to), strategic risk (you lost wealth by acting on "bad" information), operational risk (regulatory risk caused valuation of your portfolio to drop), regulatory risk (originator and marketer failed to follow laws and regulations regarding safekeeping of information) and reputational risk (originator and marketer will likely lose business because of the lawsuit and you will lose reputation as a savvy business investor).
If the information had been properly disposed of at the end of its shelf life no one would have been harmed or put at risk.
3. Information has context. Consider the following quotation by Charles Darwin:
Darwin, Charles:To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.
I would take that to mean that Darwin seems to be saying that natural selection is not the driving force in evolution. However, that quotation is taken out of context. It is removed from the environment in which it was said and the meaning twisted by the person taking it out of context. Here is the full quote in its environment:
Darwin, Charles:To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real.
If the person who just joins the chat channel has access to all of the previous information (going back to the foundation of the channel) they might read that information and discover that Warriors Ignore Pain is not on the Global Cooldown. Then they go into PvP with a macro based on that information and get roflstomped because IP is no longer on the GCD. When the information was given it was true (assumptions are that the person joined chat today and that the comment was made in January of this year). He then comes back into chat and goes on a rant to the person who made the comment about them not knowing anything and they are a noob because obviously IP IS on the GCD now. They then /ragegquits and a valuable team member is lost and the guild now has to find a new prot warrior. The information was accurate when it was made so now many moons later the data is stale and now out of context and no longer accurate.
Summary:
All Information is timely, contextual, and sensitive. Because it is those three things being able to properly dispose of it should have a very high priority.