Guild Leaders Should Have The Right To Keep Their Guilds No Matter What

I have learned that if the guild leader isn't active for 2 months, Guild Wars automatically demotes him/her and gives the spot to an officer or a member incase there are no officers. Anet is just plain wrong to create that system. It is the most lame thing Anet has come up with. If a player is not satisfied with the activity of a guild, just leave it and find something that suits you. Or make your own guild and be sure it is only made to justify your satisfaction and not others.

There may be a lot of players who love to player Guild Wars, such as myself, but it's incredibly disturbing if their is a rule that players have to actively obsessed 24/7. Guild leaders create their guilds for a variety of purposes and shouldn't be persecuted just because it's not in a PVP/GVG, PVE only, FFF (Fast Faction Farming) theme. Yes, you got players who have no lives and all they do is go on GW playing 24/7 as they complain about players around them who have a life. And these players who have a life, understands there is more to life than just playing GW. They work, they go out, they have things they might need to take care of and in hopes comes to play GW or any other hobby as a time to relax.

Some players create guilds just so they can have their own place to call home. A place where they can enjoy a fully loaded NPC hall and handle their gameplay when they want and how they want it without getting in the way of another player. Some players create guilds of members where they can keep their time flexible for on and off gameplay. It wouldn't be fair for a guild leader to have his own guild that he earned hard for to be taken away because he has a very tough job where the PCs he's around is too incompatible to play Guild Wars.

There should atleast be a system where the Guild leader chooses if he could hand the guild to someone else if they are away for quite some time or not.

Can't even bother to log in once a month? You so deserve to be demoted then.
I'm glad to hear Arenanet has finally implicated this measure.

I wasn't really talking about myself, but stop being thinking selfish or thinking this is your way to kiss up to Arenanet for every idea they come up with, even if it is just plain lame. Players and even Gaile Gray mentioned that Guild Wars would play on just about any pc. Not true. When someone plays guild wars for over a year and suddenly they can't for over 2 or 3 or just one month, then there must be something in their lives that happened, right? This computer I'm on right now, is toooooooooooooooo outdated to not prevent GW from crashing this pc. Yeah it's wack, but that's all the person of this pc can afford. Not his or her fault, that's just life for them at the moment.

I as a leader, has the right to have his guild anyway he wants it (as long it's legal). I farmed very hard to set the guild up including saving to buy all of the NPC servics, which includes the very pricey ones.

Guild Wars may be the only thing in your world, as you might live in some tiny box in Belgium, but there are players in this game that has more than just that.

You don't know what another player might be going through to have a such a situation occur. If you don't care, then this thread is definitely something you shouldn't be messing with.

If the leader can't be on for a long period of time he should let one of his trusted officers take place as the leader while he's gone. If you actually have a guild with friends and trusted people you should have no problem. But it looks like the leader just created a guild pimp'd it out with full npc's and then recruited a bunch of random people that they didn't know. I'm sorry but if you aren't on for 2 months it really shouldn't matter that much if you lose the GH. Casual gamers aren't really guild leaders, they are just the member and maybe an officer. If you want a guild hall with all the NPC's and you don't want people to take it from you don't invite random people to your guild.

Well all I have to say is that if you are a guild leader you should not be gone for at least 2 months or more at a time. I can understand your problem but if you knew this was going to happen then maybe you shouldn't have been a guild leader or had a guild with members.

/signed

No player should be subjected to losing his own guild. It's takes a lot of time and gold to make one. I've met a lot of players who couldn't be on the game for a while because of personal issues. I also own a social guild. Unlike most players, I understand there is no need to act like Hitler in a guild.

/signed

Phantom has a major point. I'm not going to bring any names, but there is a friend/Guild leader who went idle for 4 to 5 months because she just got out of a terrible abusive relationship with her boyfriend. I guesed it was one of those moments where she didn't plan to leave and give notice to her members as she wanted, she just left his place. Her ex, obviously owned a pc she was able to play Guild Wars on. I know her, personally and let me just say, it was really bad. She moved to a family members house. Their pc couldn't play it and she couldn't afford a new one for quite sometime. She finally got the pc that allowed her to play GW. It's situations like this why Arenanet shouldn't think of something tasteless as automatic demoting.

You generally have a friend officer take over the role in your absence if for some reason you can't log on. If you have absolutely no one you can even call a friend on GW to trust, then you might as well make a 1-person guild and solve that problem.

Sorry, but thats complete BS... My guild is multigame and, although I regularly log in to guild wars anyway, if I can't because i have to get things up and running in another game, which my guildies choose by the way, then I'm unhappy that this happens

What I think a lot of you are missing is the view from members and officers. If your guild leader goes inactive (especially if there are no officers) then the guild is practially dead. This way it gets given to an officer, and by the fact they are an officer that shows you have trust in them.

If you recruit random players and promote them to officer then its your fault if it goes to someone who wont give you GL back when you return. Make sure you know you can trust people before making them officers and this suddenly becomes a very helpful feature to the survivial of guilds.

I can agree that there are some reasons why a guild leader may be absent for 2 months without the ability to tell any trusted officer in the guild and hand over leadership, however I do think that this will not be very prevalent.

While this may be irksome for those that have no abilty to prevent their absence I would think there are many guilds where the leader just stops playing, and in those situations if you are in a established guild with benifits and many friends why shoudl the officers and members have to go out and get another?

I don't believe that this is an issue where Anet should rely on guild members informing them that a leader is inactive, as this could lead to abuse of that. 2 months is a long time, and if someone is absent for that time then a demotion is not unreasonable, in a previous guild if someone was inactive for 3 months they were removed from the guild, unless they stated they would be away for good reasons. The vast majority of people would be able to hand over leadership in most cases, obviously there will always be a few cases where there is no way of handing over control, however those in those guilds should not have to suffer for it, and ths would not be aproblem if thsoe who had made the guild had reliable officers and members.

The only way i see a problem here is if someone had created a guild and pulled in people that they didnt like or trust and made them into officers

/unsigned

I'm not part of this world of "posterior"-kissers you are apparently acquainted with. I'll honestly mention my opinion when I disagree.

You knew the system requirements of GW before you purchased their product. This is nobody's but your fault.

• You obviously don't know what leadership is. Obviously, you consider it synonymous with ownership. A leader has responsibilities towards his subjects. An owner on the otherhand, just "legally" owns the place, pretty much like your simplistic concept of "leadership" above.
As a leader, you own it to your members to provide them leadership.
• You neither seem to know what a guild is about. A guild is a community for all its members, not just a hall for the leader.
• You are not a Guild Leader, but a Hall Owner.

Stop it right there! the only thing you know about me, is that I live in Belgium.

I care about the good functioning of the game, but not about Guild "Leaders" that consider members as merely accessories to their hall.

A ldeader that goes out for more than a month is not a leader.

In our alliance, the leader had to leave, and put other member in charge.

If a leader is unable to assume the duties for an extended period of time they should step down. The system now does that. If that guild leader is able to return at a later date, and the guild has good people/any sort of fairness about them, then they would likely return the leadership role to the previous player, upon his return.

If you're worried that your underlings will mutany in your absence then you probably shouldn't have them in your guild to begin with.

...It REALLY isn't that hard to log on once a month...

ok all i have to say is i have spent over 800k on my guild myself, being the leader. and about a year and a half ago i had a family emergency and was not able to log on. if my guild would have been given to one of my members i prolly would have quit GW right then and there, for the sheer principle, i dont care what you guys think, guilds are PROPERTY cause the leader has to pay for them. and property is 9/10 of the law :P

The hall and upgrades don't add up to 800K. Where did you waste the extra 100's of K on?

What about your members? Do you not care about them in the least? A leaderless guild is like a ship without captain. The new feature is set to prevent the ship of going down with its former captain.

From the moment you have members in your guild, it becomes a community's virtual residence.
• If you recruit members, you paid for the rights to form an official community, of which you are the chairman, with the responsibilities that cme with that function.
• If you are the single population of your guild, your whole solo-community is 100% your property.

400k for upgrades is still alot to pay for a Guild Hall that might be given to an officer or a member. Especially if that person who inherits the guild decides to kick the leader or not even give the guild back. One of my members enjoys logging in at least once a week to try and get leadership, which he has twice. But he always gives it back. He does'nt even play when I don't play but he just likes me owing him for giving back the guild hall.

If it's a huge guild where people actually chipped in for the upgrades then yeah it would be unfair to let the leader stay. But if people just want to keep the guild and not give it back they should just buy their own guild hall and hope no one comes and inherits it. It's not only the guild hall but also the guild name that the person inherits too.
There's nothing wrong with leaving the game for a while is there? This is similar to saying if you don't play for 2 months even if your going to come back, all your stuffs get given away to people on your friend list. I guess a good thing to do would be to kick all your members if you don't want anyone taking the hall.
I'm just glad my member gave leadership back to me, I assume these angry posts are about people losing their guild and even membership.

While your suggestion has merit, your tactics force me to close this thread. Also there have been several threads on this issue, and your post appears to be more of a rant than a suggestion.

Using three accounts in one thread to create and then back up/defend the OP is not appropriate or fair to the people having a discussion. Members rightfully assume that postings under different user names are different people, not one person using multiple accounts to repeat and defend the original position.

Keep all your postings in any one thread to one account please.