Raiding ranks

[JonnyAppleSeed]

Just a little jiggle to the rank system we have.

Social = you got it
Standby (need to think of a better name) = Members unable to make raid attendance
Honoured = people who are available to raid 2/3 official raid nights

A bit of background

Looking at the attendance levels over the last 6 weeks it's not viable to run a solid 25 man capable of moving the guild forward. We need to fill the gaps in the raid roster. I'm asking RL's to place people who can't / have not made the attendance requirements into a standby rank. If you feel you have been ranked as standby unfairly then let us know. The fact is that we need people on to build our raid if you can't make the levels needed then we need to recruit and fill in the spots. So yes as standby we are already looking for people to fill that spot. The ranks are flexible and should show the current status of a member. The rank of honoured will no longer be for life but should be something that is achieved through commitment

[Drakelin]

defo get a name change for the standby, it really has a harsh negative ring to it to be honest.

And i had an idea jas, how about making a poll with what nights ppl can attend, maybe figure that ist the raiding nights and not the 2/3 attendance thats the issue? looking at the 25man guild pug this wedensday?

[DFE]

Hi Jas,

I spoke about our ranks structure a week ago with Gondromir. It for sure serves its purpose but I as a relatively new member/raider just dont seem to get it 100% correctly.

I can see very steep structure at the "management" level, having 6 ranks there while it is very flat at lower levels, having only 2 ranks covering raiders, socials, trials, alts and inactive raiders. Then there are two lowest ranks, one is for somehow banned/hacked people and the other one? For long-term inactives?

Current structure:
0 - GM
1 - Council? + 2 alts
2 - Officers
3 - Alts of 0-2
4 - QM
5 - Class leaders
6 - raiders + socials + inactive raiders / "standbyÃ,´s"
7 - alts of 5-7 + trial raiders + inactives
8 - inactives?
9 - dark corner

The structure as I see it doesnt give me an answer to a basic question: how many raiders do we have. While I dont have insight into guild deep enough to cover every issue/rank/case I can try to come up with an idea of a clear structure:

0 - GM
1 - Guild Council/Officers
2 - Class Leaders
3 - Raiders
4 - Trial raiders / "StandbyÃ,´s"
5 - Socials
6 - Alts of 0-2 - of course, this could be moved higher if needed
7 - Alts of 3-5
8 - Inactives
9-  Dark Corner

Idea behind this is that it is more comprehensible compared to structure we have now - and where one only has to guess what some ranks mean and what groups of people are contained in those ranks. This structure is more "role oriented" if you want to have it named
Please, let me know if I didnt understand correctly to our current structure, at least it will make me more educated

Cheers, DFE

[sheepy]

current structure is

GM
Guild leaders  -  exalted
Officers / council - exalted

Alts of above - exALTed

Class leaders  - Reveared

QM - Quarter master

raiders - Honored

Social and alts - Friendly

inactive - 2-6 months

punishment / hacked - doghouse

[JonnyAppleSeed]

Almost but not quite right

Gm
Guild leader (set up to remove officers if they get hacked as happened with Gond)
Officer
Officer Alts (tho we could merge this)
quartermaster (keeps the bank in order)
Roll leaders
Raiders
Standby
Social
Dog house.. for the naughty ones

[TeaLeaf]

Meh, I had a draft reply and forgot to post it - so I got beaten to it by both Sheepy & Jas!  Oh well, back to the scrumpy for me!