Forum:Diminishing Clan Chat Spaces, Round 2

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Diminishing Clan Chat Spaces, Round 2
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 12 February 2012 by Liquidhelium.
Previous discussion is at Forum:Diminishing Clan Chat Spaces.

In the last discussion on the subject of our clan chat being overly full, there were a few things that were decided upon. Among them are the points that (1) to stay in the clan, users must gain 5000 xp per month or be seen in the clan chat and that (2_ a waitlist is to be established when the clan hits 450 clanmates (changed to 475 later).

I'd like to propose that we change these requirements to:

  • Users who do not gain any xp in a month and are not seen in the clan may be kicked.
  • A waitlist is to be established when the clan is full.

The first point is the more important one. The data for xp gained in the last three weeks can be found at User:Liquidhelium/Clan Chat/Hiscores (sort by xp gained for clarity). In those three weeks, only a few users gained between 0 and 5000 xp, far fewer than the clanmates who gained nothing at all. Due to the fact that one must login to gain xp, I don't think it's in our interest to kick users who have gained xp, as it shows interest. The users we're more interested in kicking are inactives who may have quit the game or are taking an extended break. Those users, who have gained 0 xp, are much better kick targets.

When I go and compile the kick list, I'd really loathe to have to kick someone who gained xp, as it shows that the person is at least interested and playing, regardless of how little xp that person may have gained. The bottom line is that the vast majority of players either gain a lot more than 5000 or gain nothing at all; we should not be excluding the small number who fall within 0 and 5000.

Space should not be an issue, as we should soon have more than 120 open spaces, by my estimates. Kicking those who have gained fewer than 5000 xp and have not been seen in the clan chat would free up maybe four or five more spots, which is not really a worthwhile tradeoff in my opinion, as the cost is kicking a potentially active clanmate.

The second issue, and one less likely to arise, given our current space situation, is the establishment of a waitlist. Waitlists in real life are for when a program is full, and should any vacancies occur, people from the waitlist will be admitted. I think it's really stupid to establish a waitlist when there are 50 empty spots, as passed in the thread (yes, I think it's stupid even though I was the one who came up with that number), especially considering that in the five months since the previous thread, we've gained only about twenty new clanmates after subtracting those who left. I mean, are we really going to turn away interested players when we have 50 open spots? Even when it was later reduced to 25, that is still silly.

I'd like the waitlist to be used only when the clan is full, and as vacancies occur, players are invited in the order that they joined the waitlist. I don't think this is a particularly likely situation to actually occur, as we will have a lot more space soon, but in the event that it does we should at least follow the principle of a real waitlist. Note that vacancies can occur in the middle of a month due to players leaving, while the larger vacancies occur when inactive clanmates are kicked.

Discuss. --LiquidTalk 17:59, February 3, 2012 (UTC)


Support both - As nominator. --LiquidTalk 17:59, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Support both - Absolutely agree with the second point. The only reason I can see to start a waiting list early is to reduce the rate of members joining, which really isn't an issue based on the current growth. The first point is an improvement in my opinion but probably not one that is needed as such. A certain amount of common sense could be used to prevent the unlikely active player being kicked, or even to allow them to retrospectively rejoin. Given the careful manner in which the kickings were done previously these problems are unlikely to arise. --Henneyj 18:36, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Support both - Reading through your decently sized article gave me some opinions, then took them away in the form of saying exactly what I was going to say later in. For the sake of repetition, I'm going to say per nominator. Achievements Coelacanth0794 Talk Contribs 18:57, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Support both - I really couldn't have said it better myself, except maybe why not ~5 for the waiting list, so there is a buffer for priority inviting users established on the wiki to join/re-join etc. (Same arguement against could be used, but I'm just putting it out there) RSDaftVader 22:33, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Support both/Comment - My only comment is that with these points in place, members who earn any amount xp, but do not participate in clan events or the chat whatsoever would still be considered a viable member of the clan. My point is that in the future, if the demand for joining becomes too high, I think that clan participation should be weighted more heavily than xp accumulated. Unfortunately judgement there would be subjective, but I place a member who participates with no xp gain over a member who gains any amount of xp in a given time period and does not participate. That being said, I believe the two points above are by far the best course of action for now. Red partyhat detail.png Pen Draig Talk King Black Dragon.png 23:39, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - To address the issue of priority when inviting, we can add a provision that says that a user with a rank and/or a user that was in the clan previously will be put at the front of the waitlist, should such an instance occur. (If more than one user who was previously in the clan wants to join, then we can just put them in the order that they requested the invite.) --LiquidTalk 00:38, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

Support/Comment - I'd like to point out that there are some instances where logging in isn't determined by choice - as in my case, studying in Japan and having my computer destroyed // being unable to log on reliably from another computer. I was unable to log in for more then an hour a week (in best cases, not logging in for months in my worst case) for about six months, due to an unreliable internet connection/lack of a computer. Ergo, I'd like to see about adding a sort of 'Emergency Clause' where, if something comes up that puts an already established clanmate out of commission for a lengthy amount of time, they can let someone know and either be kept for a while OR be placed at the front of the waitlist upon return, as per liquids comment above mine.

Sheep chathead.png DumuzidSheep chathead.png 00:47, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - not being in the clan I'll stay out of the support/oppose part, but I know it's a system that is used in other clans to determine activity. Mining Golds requires a 1m xp gain per month, but bear in mind they have almost 2 full clans and a 1800 total level entry requirement. For someone with my skills 5k xp is an inventory of curly roots in Jadinko Lair, not particularly taxing, but possibly a little daunting to low levels. I would imagine most clanmates would gain 5k from merely maxing in the citadel though. cqm talk 01:00, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

Support Both - Though I did not contribute to the first discussion concerning the issue of clan spaces, I did however follow it rather closely. The proposed changes above are far better than the current solution. Specifically, I feel that having a waiting list when the clan is full is far more logical than having one when there are still spaces available. Regarding the kicking of inactive clan members: one month with no xp gain is reasonable grounds for this. However, the clan admins must be proactive in determining whether any of these individuals has been seen in the clan chat first. Raglough 02:53, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry, the list will be compiled and left up for at least a week to allow people to identify active users. It will also be advertised heavily in the clan chat. Unlike the list in December, which was only left up for one week, the first kicks, due to size, will be up for at least two weeks. --LiquidTalk 18:54, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

Support Both/Comment While I am no longer in the clan, and while this wouldn't affect me since I don't play RuneScape that much anyways (and so would be kicked if I did join), I like these idea,. especially number two, and I agree with them. But I don't know where you think these extra free spaces will come from "soon", Liquid. -- Cycloneblaze (user - talk - contribs) 16:27, February 4, 2012 (UTC)

The first kick list is quite large. See User:Liquidhelium/Clan Chat/Hiscores for the number of people who have 0 xp gain after 3 weeks. I doubt many of them will get anything in week 4. --LiquidTalk 18:57, February 4, 2012 (UTC)
I see. That is quite a few (and a big enough buffer for new recruits). Thanks Liquid. -- Cycloneblaze (user - talk - contribs) 19:21, February 5, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - The current kick list is found User:Liquidhelium/Clan Chat#Currently under consideration. It currently numbers at 140, though that will undoubtedly go down as users get identified. Please look it over and tell me if you recognize anyone on that list. --LiquidTalk 19:22, February 5, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - About a week after I added the original activity section to RS:CC (which was when A proofbot first scraped the hiscores), I added a section on extended breaks and how to handle them - the user should contact an active CC admin (preferably me or Liquid as we tend to be the ones in charge of the kicklist and such, though any admin works so long as it is noted somewhere and we know of it), preferably via their talk page to give us a 'written', on-wiki, record of it to point to. This does somewhat answer Dumuzid's point above. As a second note, as that was not part of the original thread, if that is to be confirmed/removed/expanded/whatever, this would be a good place to do so. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s

Support both, kinda. I agree with the waitlist being at 495 of 500 users per User:RSDaftVader. However, I don't agree with only kicking users if they gain exactly 0 EXP, because that would invite gaming the system via logging in, getting some EXP and logging out, once a month. A blend of occasional Clan Chat activity and EXP would be a better criterion to judge a player's activity.

 a proofreader ▸ 

04:43, February 7, 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't consider that as GTS because that's kind of the point of lowering the threshold to 1 xp. If someone has logged in, then that demonstrates some interest in RuneScape and the RSW clan, and thus I'd rather not kick him or her. I mean, with the kick list being over 130 members, our space issues will be solved shortly, so I'd really rather err on the side of caution.
Furthermore, if someone was going to log in, gain 1 xp, and log out, he might as well tell me not to kick him, and I won't. --LiquidTalk 04:51, February 7, 2012 (UTC)

Support There doesn't seem to anything wrong with this proposal. Matt (t) 05:58, February 7, 2012 (UTC)

Closed - The requirements to remain in the RSW clan are 1 xp in a one-month period, or to be recognized in the clan chat. A waitlist will be established when the clan is full, but former members of the clan who previous left of their own accord or who were kicked for inactivity will be given precedence in the waitlist. Users who will be going on extended leave and who wish to keep their spots in the clan should notify a clan chat administrator. RS:CC will be updated accordingly. --LiquidTalk 08:34, February 12, 2012 (UTC)