Skip to Content
3-30-2009 @ 2:49PM
Does 'bad' mean low skill? Spencer asks how feasible it would be to remove "the members who don't seem to have the same goals in mind as the officers", not "the players with low dps and stupid specs who stand in the fire". Interesting that that's the first thing people think of though (including Scott, it seems).I would suggest that discussion on the guild forum, followed by laying out the vision of the officers and those guildies who bothered to respond constructively to the discussion post would be one way to go.He could reward the people who do participate in guild life the way the officers would like everyone to do - for some reason, ranks seem to motivate people - and if absolutely necessary enforce certain minimum levels of participation. For example, if one aim is to get people to help each other through heroics for gear/rep, then he could allocate raid slots according to helpfulness (among other criteria of course) and not draft the particularly unhelpful people. This won't change the naturally selfish people, but it will encourage the people who were just lacking motivation or who "just didn't think".Some suggestions anyway.
First time? A confirmation email will be sent to you after submitting.
Members enter your username and password.
Enter your AOL or AIM screenname and password.
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.