Square of 144 is here

Saladin · Post by **Saladin** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 10:03 am

gm_al wrote:And there you have a more public discussion, Sal.

(I dont think we are discussing those issues "in private" in the WSC - we hardly have any mail exchange at all....)

LOL even worse!

discussion is what brings out the flaws in a proposal. Plus discussions are fun.

Saladin · Post by **Saladin** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 10:13 am

Don't erase the Clan Kaohalla Al. Although i don't really give much importance to it, it is part of the WOK history and should be preserved.

Just have one simple rule.

Once a clan is listed as dead/disbanded/on hiatus/inactive or whatever... IT IS GONE!

Nobody can restart a clan.

No silly exceptions like the founder (sometimes a clan is founded by multiple players) or first clan head...no...nobody.

END OF PROBLEM.

PS: I'm glad some of the people are now starting to realise that a LOT of things have not been defined properly in WOK and therefore are always open to debat...so i ask the WSC to go ahead and shut down as many loopholes as they can.

Post by **gm_al** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 11:36 am

Well that is EXACTLY what I was trying to do.... maybe Ill just ask to drop the current vote #19 and re-formulate it like:

"Once a clan is publically declared as dead/disbanded/on hiatus/inactive etc. it is to be considered as CLOSED and its VPs may not be claimed by any other or successor Clan. Closed Clans may not be re-opened. This rule is retroactive and thus also need to be applied to all concerned Clans."

Anyone wanna help me re-formulate this maybe ?

(And in a way that closes all loopholes possibly....)

Post by **Egbert** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 11:54 am

gm_al wrote:"Once a clan is publically declared as dead/disbanded/on hiatus/inactive etc. it is to be considered as CLOSED and its VPs may not be claimed by any other or successor Clan. Closed Clans may not be re-opened. This rule is retroactive and thus also need to be applied to all concerned Clans."

Anyone wanna help me re-formulate this maybe ?

I would help you reformulate it --- if I was in favor of it.

I thought that clans were supposed to be the backbone of WOK, and a part of our proud history? Why should the founder (or clan head, etc.) be prevented from resurrecting his old clan? What happened to tradition?

Let's say that for some reason, Clan XYZ, which has been around for a long time, suddenly finds that they can't hold on or attract a 4th player (similar to what happened to Thuggee, I believe). They end up being declared void or inactive or ineligible or whatever. Several months later, the clan founder tries to gather up the old members, and attracts a couple of new players, to resurrect the clan. Why shouldn't that be allowed to happen? I would think that something like that should be encouraged.

Oh well, I guess I'm in the minority on this one, just like my thoughts on putting restrictions on forming new clans.

Post by **Lardmaster** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 12:13 pm

Wow look at all the fun i've missed not being online

Firstly I'm in SoO cos it looks fun and I agreed with X-Wings aim.
Secondly I don't have anything particular against Dameon I just don't always agree with him.
Thirdly, I'm with Eg on resureccting clans. I would have struggled on with Thugee had I known I might not be able to resurrect it next year.
Fourthly I want to apologise again to UT for going M3 in his game (not all in one go) but sometimes work calls and I don't have internet access.
Fiftly I would like world peace.

Saladin · Post by **Saladin** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 12:48 pm

Egbert wrote:[quote="gm_al"Let's say that for some reason, Clan XYZ, which has been around for a long time, suddenly finds that they can't hold on or attract a 4th player (similar to what happened to Thuggee, I believe). They end up being declared void or inactive or ineligible or whatever. Several months later, the clan founder tries to gather up the old members, and attracts a couple of new players, to resurrect the clan. Why shouldn't that be allowed to happen? I would think that something like that should be encouraged.

A clan does'n't have to be disbanded when it doesn't have 4 active players for a while...they will however lose their spot on the WSC.

Actually i'm not that in favour of the 4 player minimum to be called a clan. I don't care if it's 2 players or 12 to me both are clans. However you can have a 4 player minimum to get a spot on the WSC.

Therefore a clan only will get disbanded if it's clan head quits Kaomaris and there aren't even 2 other players around to take over. To me that clan is dead...dead clans is not a bad thing, it happens in real life as well and they get followed up by new clans, thus creating a real history in Kaomaris. I mean the world history is full of powerful nations that gradually dissappeared over time...that's life.

Post by **korexus** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 1:10 pm

Personally (and I'm *actually* going to state my *actual* opinion here, so listen up folks!) I don't think there should be any hard and fast rule on this.

If you make any rock solid ruling then there will always be a case which feels unfair and then some rules lawyer or other will come along and find a loop hole anyway and everything descends into chaos.

Much fairer would be if anyone wanting to pick up old clan VPs had to ask the WSC first. Nice and easy. Anyone who was just after VPs from a clan they'd never even heard of wouldn't stand a chance and in an AS/VO scenario, if the new clan could make a good case then they could get them. (Here it comes to my high and mighty opinion, pay attention!)

I, personally, DO think that Nick made a good case for getting the Ar-Sereg VPs. The reason I've been vocal against it from time to time is that all he did was say "Nothing says I can't, so I will". If I had been on the WSC and Nick had come forward with his new clan and the background story asking for the AS VPs I would have voted for him. However the manner in which he actually took them seemed very childish and against the entire spirit of WoK. Therefore I was against it.

OK I think that's everything. If TK were still in the scholars I'd probably have to leave now for nominally supporting Dameon. But he isn't so never mind!

korexus.

Post by **gm_al** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 1:48 pm

EXCELLENT idea, really.

Just changed my mind again, Im fully supporting this. Any Clans having to get WSC permission to take over old VPs must state its case and "results may vary".

Just have to make sure that this applies to all kind of changes (new name, hibernating Clan, disbanded one etc.) and is also valid retroactive.

BigJOzzy · Post by **BigJOzzy** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 2:11 pm

Well since everyone else is, I think I will stick my two cents in also.

Why change everything about your clan.....name and so forth, and then try to keep the VP's? I mean if you are going to complettly change the name then are you not going for a whole new look, so make a new clan......and move on. If you are as good as you think then you will have the clan points in the next period to show it.

Now donut I will say this for your benifit. Dameon is a master of getting others to work against whomever he considers to be strongest in any game. He will then turn on most of those who helped him if they in turn have become too strong. Just know that in any game you are playing with fire if you work with him and if he thinks of you as a threat. What he is also a master of is playing ALL sides at the same time and playing ALL sides against each other. If you haven't had the chance yet then you have been warned.

Massielita

Saladin · Post by **Saladin** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 4:27 pm

Yeah that's Dameon alright! He reminds me so much of myself it's uncanny.

BTW our friend Hannibal over there could have been Nick's illigitemate child the way he conducts his diplomacy.

Post by **gm_al** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 4:51 pm

Ive now retracted my vote #19 and replaced it with #19b:

#19b - Old VPs
Any Clan claiming VPs from a Clan with a different name and/or that was disbanded/hibernated/suspended etc. can only do so by calling the WSC which then has to vote on each case. This rule will be applied in a retroactive way to the Clans VO and SoO. Both Clans need to apply before the WSC if they wish to get the VPs from another Clan they claim to be related to.

Results should be in by Sunday.

Lowebb · Post by **Lowebb** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 4:57 pm

*quickly scribbles his application form*

How does a clan apply for this. As far as I remember you have to be in the wsc to send emails to the mailing list?

I will be however waiting to hear the conclusion of the AS-VO VP before I decide whether I apply for CoN VP's

(In other words if VO gets to keep said VPs all hell will yet again break loose)

Saladin · Post by **Saladin** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 5:31 pm

Actually if VO doesn't get to keep AS's vps something is terribly wrong with the WSC.

Al you proposal actually consists of two proposals. I feel you should vote on each seperately.

Any Clan claiming VPs from a Clan with a different name and/or that was disbanded/hibernated/suspended etc. can only do so by calling the WSC which then has to vote on each case.

AND

This rule will be applied in a retroactive way to the Clans VO and SoO. Both Clans need to apply before the WSC if they wish to get the VPs from another Clan they claim to be related to.

I would like to point out that this doesn't stop any bickering and flame wars as now there aren't any rules set and people will still argue and fight over mute points like my clan was inactive instead of disbanded. I feel we've missed a chance here to put an end to this topic once and for all as now it will keep coming up every time somebody wants to take over a clan.

Calidus · Post by **Calidus** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 8:14 pm

Hey Ben, why don't you go ahead and make a call to get the VPS from AS for the square of 144. Wouldn't that incite the LARGEST flamer EVER?????

Lowebb · Post by **Lowebb** » Sun Feb 29, 2004 4:39 pm

All in good time Calidus, all in good time..... mmmmuuuuuaaaaaahhhhhaaahhhaaahhhaaaaa!!!