Skip to Content
5-11-2009 @ 1:46PM
...this is a touchy subject these days, but I don't know that I entirely agree with the response to this writer.I will agree that -yes- the right decision was made by giving the fragment to the officer because of his history within the guild, however I do not agree with the method that was used to come to this decision. Too many guilds have this policy of 'not being an officer' being equal to 'not having a voice', and this is what happened in this case. And while I also agree that the other healers refusing to join raids is an immature knee-jerk reaction, it goes hand-in-hand with the decisions that led there; the cause resulted in the effect. If their opinion did/does not matter when loot was/is distributed, why bother going at all? A bad precedent was set, and if I were one of those healers, I'd be seriously questioning my place in that particular group of people. The perception that they don't matter is now in place, and that will be very difficult to heal.In sum, the fragment went to the right person, but the methodology of reaching that outcome was flawed, in my opinion. The loot-council method of gear distribution will never fail to cause drama.
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.