Think we should just keep letting whomever wants join the alliance? Sure we did this to grow strong as an alliance and most people are quality players but I know there are people out there that have been kicked, spam, do things that we as an alliance generally dont stand for etc.. Similarly with TC at least, we have 100 people and the most inactivity any one member has is 1 week.

So should we start being a bit more scrutinous with people wanting to join? Like asking them where they play/timezone etc...so they can be directed to the right guild or a mini quiz to show competance?

No, it shouldn't be whomever. We have the power of choice.. people want in, we're usually full..

There is actually a waiting list now with 6 people on it, 2 of which Im sure would be great assets.

Some of the new members are questionable in personality, I think.

So far how this is how recruiting works: Someone PMs an officer, that officer says we're full, broadcasts in alliance chat, and someone just picks them up. There is no screening involved. It shouldn't work like this, considering immature kids will ruin the image of this alliance.

As demonstrated on the Gaile Gray appreciation day, we have several immature kids in our alliance who prefers to discriminate against jews and humiliate themselves in public.

This is how an endgame WoW guild accepts applicants:

1. The applicant posts an application according to the specifications of the leader.
2. The application is then taken into review by the current guild members for 1 week. If they approve, the applicant is accepted into the guild as a "recruit" who is subject to be kicked if the current members find his behaviour immature/idiotic/n00bish or any other reason that does not fit into the overall image of the guild.
3. A week after the recruit has been invited, the members again takes a vote. If majority approves, the recruit is promoted to a permenant member of the guild, if not, the guild either remove the recruit immediately, or wait another week for another vote to take place.

Of course the period of pending acceptance or promotion to permenant member differs from guild to guild, but this is the basic structure of how it works. Usually there are designated officers who monitors the behaviour of the recruit.

I think we should adopt this system since we're really running low on free space, and personally I would prefer quality over quantity. The current left over free slots in each guild should be reserved to those who are dedicated, mature, and friendly.

On a side note, what's the current roster status of our allianced guilds? Are they all closed to 100 members?

Thats a lot of waiting and voting :P

It is indeed too much wating and voting, but it might work real fine. I think we should go for it, being a little more selective in this matter will help our guild-gameplay to improve a lot. Besides we do have a rep to hold, and we shouldn't risk it accpeting everyone who wants to join.

It looks pretty good to me, but maybe we could do something like have them fill out a sort of quiz, like was suggested at first, and then a vote could be taken right away once the quiz was filled out. If the vote was 2/3 majority, they would be let in. If the vote was more then 1/2 for letting the person in but not at 2/3, they would be let in for a week then another vote would take place.

Also, there could be some nomination process for members/officers to nominate people to join our guild, giving them a better chance to stay. As in, you go through the quiz and get voted in to the guild, then nominate your friend to join.

Edit: Also, there probably would be a need for more waiting in World of Warcraft guilds because there needs to be a lot more planning for the raid encounters.

Before I became a member of The Crusaders what struck me was the want to eliminate elitism from the game. It was posted in these forums that this was one of the major reasons for ferrying people to The Deep. Although I am new here, I think we need to be vigilant in considering the process of accepting people to the guild. If we start a rigorous process of selection don?t we reinvent the very elitism we try to end?

Just a thought

Peace,
Lord Te

I thought about that, I think that as long as we let most people in it wouldn't be like that. Since we do remove people who are immature from the alliance, this would just let us skip the phase of that where they join and give us a bad name.

There's a difference between elitism and creating standards. The alliance has to react to the fact that we are an elite alliance. Players want to join us because we are #1. We can't accept everyone. We especially shouldn't accept troublemakers, or those who would not help the alliance.

This microcosm of society, created by this Alliance, would actually make a great term paper. You can look at human nature, you could debate socialism vs capitalism. Is there a need for elitism in the modern society?

Some things for debate... it is clear that our alliance has been successful based on generosity. Yet, it is also clear that good will is not infinate. How do we maintain the strength of the alliance when our goals have already been met? It is clear that we Faction Farm best when we are losing. How do you motivate players otherwise? How do you divide limited resources? More people want to join this alliance than we can allow.

What is ethical? Have our actions as an alliance helped or hurt the game? There is a lot to concider and discuss. For now, I think it's clear that we have the right and a need to be selective. I think if we simply created a Faction Farming requirement, of 10,000 a week per player, we'd see a sharp drop in players requesting to join.

__________________
Michael Garofalo
Webmaster - http://photics.com

In response to guild size, CKIE is at about 60 to 70 members last I checked. As for why it's not near 100, we are a competitive guild and have decided to only accept new members if we have played with them before and liked their abilities/attitude. I don't think this policy made us hard to get into, and it went a long way in making sure we didn't constantly have people giving us a bad image.