Clans

[Djinn]

You're thinking of a different kind of rivalry. The kind we want to avoid is the hostile, angry, bitter hatreds. For example, what people think of the knights now. It's a deeply rooted anger. Or maybe you can compare it to two competing religions like Christianity and Islam. They are rivals, but hostile rivals. The kind of rivalry we want is something more like sports rivals. There would be competition, but it wouldn't be out of anger and it wouldn't be about destroying and undermining the position opposing you.

You cannot have sports teams when everyone is a member of all teams at the same time.

 

[Aurelia]

Nope, that doesnt necessarly has to be the point of having clans. You are just looking it from one perspective. I already explained of how this can work without rivalries. But yes, yearly competitions can be a part of it, if ZD wants it that is.

But you missed what I said, it helps the person(s) in the clan as a whole to know each other; converse with one another, and just be a happy family that is apart from the main community. The competitions that we have is just a bonus to interact with one another, it isn’t necessarily an important thing that we could do. It works well like that at ZU because of the amount of newbies who don’t know how to make friends in a bigger section, can help them in a smaller group with common interests.

I really dislike repeating my arguments so ill just copypaste

[ilquote=onilink89]Because its has a purpose and actualy would help people to get closer who shares a common interest in specific boards. I don't see a "fan-artist" to be a rival of a "mature debater" for example.[/ilquote]

Uh, okay, if you would’ve read my post thoroughly I have explained this in my argument;

The whole point of clans is to better each other and know who we all could relate to. You make friends with other people who you have no idea who you will encounter and once out of the year we have a competition to get us closer as a whole to work with our group against others.

I’m not entirely saying that ZD can do this, I have no problem with it, but it’s too inactive to do and not a lot of people will be happy with it.

 

[Onilink89]

Uh, okay, if you would’ve read my post thoroughly I have explained this in my argument;

Your argument didn't explained anything. All i read is that there is no point of having clans because we have groups, shoutbox and skype and that alone is already enough to bring members closer and this clan idea is just clutter. I don't see this as an argument, i see this as an assumption or an inference objection to be exact.

If you don't care, or you can't talk about the idea constructively, then don't post. All you are doing is creating a negative feeling and making people not want to come to the thread.

Look Aurelia, since our discussion is just going into loops now and can't seem to understand eachother, im pulling myself out from this thread. I already gave my suggestion, and the arguments of how this can work out. If it doesn't work out, then the staff can always remove it, but i see no harm in trying.

 

[Mellow Ezlo]

There is nothing I could say right now that hasn't already been brought up in this thread, so I'll just say I understand most of the points brought up both for and against the possibility of adding clans to this site. As it stands, I'm willing to support the addition of a clan system because I feel like the pros overpower the cons (for now).

The question I keep seeing, though, is how many clans to add. Almost everybody who has said something regarding that has mentioned something Zelda related. Let us not forget that this is both a Zelda and Pokémon forum. Zelda is the dominant species here already, so I believe a clan system would be a good way to give the Pokémon series some more love. I brought this idea up earlier in this thread, and I stand by it; I think the general consensus is to have 6 clans, which seems reasonable, so how about basing them off the 6 main villainous teams in the Pokémon series? You've got Team Rocket, Team Aqua, Team Magma, Team Galactic, Team Plasma and Team Flare. You could choose which team you would rather join, perhaps based off the respective Team's motives/personality (Team Rocket is power hungry, Team Aqua fights for the good of water Pokémon, etc.). Obviously, we're not villains here, but we could join the team we want if our personality is similar to theirs. I think it would be cool to call myself a member of one of the villainous teams, even if it is just for fun on an internet forum.

Of course, the issue here is how you go about joining. Do you simply choose the one you like best and join? Do you get voted in based on your personality by other members of the clan? Do you take some sort of personality quiz to determine which clan you'd fit in with best? I'm sure something could be figured out.

 

[Emma]

We are having a lot of ideas for clans. I still think it's important to allow people to join at least three clans. Insisting to allow only one severely limits our options and will make things too likely to cause trouble. Say we get a lot of ideas for Pokemon and for Zelda, having to force them to choose between them takes some of the fun out of it. The villian teams there is an idea that I think can lead to a lot of possiblities. But we can't just focus on only Pokemon and only those teams. We don't have to emulate Zelda Universe.

On that note, I think we shouldn't do personality quizes. I just think people should be able to join any clan they want when they ask. Some cap on the number, like either three or six, would keep things reasonable while not holding things back. It should work with our plan for user badges anyway. There's be room for several. The plan I have to what to turn the knights into would depend on the ability to join more than one. More clans can open more possiblities. We can have some that just operate on their objective without interaction with the other clans. Like my idea for knights, and the ideas for clans for writers, artists, debators, etc. And some of these other ideas for themed clans are more laid back and for fun and can more easily have competitions between them. Like all the Pokemon villain clans having organized, planned competitions.

 

[Jamie]

Why wouldn't this Hylian Knight "clan" work as a group?

 

[Spiritual Mask Salesman]

Were exactly is this whole thing going? Why are we talking about how clans could work if we have yet to even determine if we are setting up a clan system. My advice, we should set up a poll if it hasn't already been done.

 

[Emma]

Why wouldn't this Hylian Knight "clan" work as a group?

The point of this clan idea is that it doesn't matter if people don't think a clan has a point because joining would be voluntary and there'd be no voting. I really wish people would stop comparing clans to groups. Groups are not the same thing. They are harder to manage, no one knows any one group exists, they don't have the advantage of a well defined forum. Being visible from the main forum hub gives them exposure and awareness that keps keep activity going while groups are forgotten and if someone doesn't post that day, all the others will wash it out like it doesn't exist. Individual groups are NOTHING like what clans would be. A group would be more like a thread, it might last for a bit, but it's inevitably going to wither and die and pushed into the foreground. A clan is more like a forum section, it'll always be visible no matter what and nothing can push them into the background. The problem of management, is that for groups to be private, it requires one person, just one person, managing it alone. Being responsible for all join requests, and moderating it, all on their on. If that person is gone or inactive, it can stagnant. A clan doesn't have that weakness and multiple people on staff can handle anything that comes up and the joining requests. Groups for this purpose haven't worked before because of these reasons. Like I said, they are like threads, no matter how interesting they are, they're eventually pushed out of people's notice.

 

[(◕‿◕✿)]

We can either talk about this for another 5 pages and have 10 more polls that will amount to nothing, or we could just try the novel concept of doing something for once. Make a couple publicly joinable clans, remove HK. Done. That's all there is to it.


Start suggesting themes/names for clans instead of bickering about "oh how will the epistemology be reasoned out?" or other pointless things. Then we can just make them and stop dragging our feet about something that is such a mind-numbingly nonissue that it shouldn't even be considered at this point.

 

[Emma]

We can either talk about this for another 5 pages and have 10 more polls that will amount to nothing, or we could just try the novel concept of doing something for once. Make a couple publicly joinable clans, remove HK. Done. That's all there is to it.


Start suggesting themes/names for clans instead of bickering about "oh how will the epistemology be reasoned out?" or other pointless things. Then we can just make them and stop dragging our feet about something that is such a mind-numbingly nonissue that it shouldn't even be considered at this point.

Well no... it's not trying it out, it is one side gets their way in the "test." which would mean that regardless of how it goes, there will be resistance to adding it back. How about a test pilot of something that is NOT controversial? Instead of getting one side's way of no knights, or the other side's of keeping them around in some form, we instead do a test run with some neutral concepts. Do a trial run with a few themed clans to stretch our legs.

 

[Seth]

If we can join multiple clans, then what makes clans any different than groups? You can join many groups, they have their own discussion area etc. There are already groups for forum members who want to be helpful and post better.

 

[Emma]

If we can join multiple clans, then what makes clans any different than groups? You can join many groups, they have their own discussion area etc. There are already groups for forum members who want to be helpful and post better.

At the risk of repeating myself:

The point of this clan idea is that it doesn't matter if people don't think a clan has a point because joining would be voluntary and there'd be no voting. I really wish people would stop comparing clans to groups. Groups are not the same thing. They are harder to manage, no one knows any one group exists, they don't have the advantage of a well defined forum. Being visible from the main forum hub gives them exposure and awareness that keps keep activity going while groups are forgotten and if someone doesn't post that day, all the others will wash it out like it doesn't exist. Individual groups are NOTHING like what clans would be. A group would be more like a thread, it might last for a bit, but it's inevitably going to wither and die and pushed into the foreground. A clan is more like a forum section, it'll always be visible no matter what and nothing can push them into the background. The problem of management, is that for groups to be private, it requires one person, just one person, managing it alone. Being responsible for all join requests, and moderating it, all on their on. If that person is gone or inactive, it can stagnant. A clan doesn't have that weakness and multiple people on staff can handle anything that comes up and the joining requests. Groups for this purpose haven't worked before because of these reasons. Like I said, they are like threads, no matter how interesting they are, they're eventually pushed out of people's notice.

This covers most of it. In addition, unless I have seriously misunderstood things, things that are deleted in a group are just gone. This has been the case before when things are gone. This means if anything is deleted that shouldn't have been, it can't be recovered. And if something actually worth punishing is deleted, the record of it is gone and it'd be hard to justify an infraction if there isn't evidence of what happened. Clans would function like any other forum section in that regard and deleted content could be recovered, as well as viewed when required for reference in dealing with someone that did something wrong.

 

[Spiritual Mask Salesman]

I agree with kitsu, let's just test it out, see how it goes, and then go from there. The idea of joining mutiple clans isn't something I agree with, it sort of defeats the whole purpose as many have said before me.

 

[Justac00lguy]

We need to decide what we're doing. Set clans or custom clans? How many clans? Names and purpose of clans.

 

[Seth]

I think Set Clans is the best. Custom clans will end up like groups, all forgotten and abandoned imo.