I understand why guild ownership transfers are currently not handled by staff, based on the points Dave mentioned: It is not possible to obtain confirmation from every guild member before selecting a new leader Staff should not decide on behalf of the guild when multiple members may request the Guild Master role However, situations like this (https://royals.ms/forum/threads/transfer-guild-leader.257056/#post-1613597) still result in active guilds disappearing entirely when a Guild Master is permanently banned. A possible solution: Only allow transfers if a Guild Master is permanently banned Require confirmation via the Guild Master’s forum account, linked to the same email address as the in-game account so staff can verify ownership This would remove the need for staff to choose between multiple candidates, while still allowing established guilds to continue. Right now, active communities are lost entirely, which feels like a bigger downside than the risks mentioned.
Once that the leader become banned, don't you think that, if people stop playing because of a guy who intentionally went against the rules, its good that them stop playing? And it even makes the impact of being banned even powerful, due to maybe making those people thinking about their specific community before thinking about break rules?
I'm sorry you lost your guild leader. I hope you're all okay. I do wonder if it would save a lot of guilds if GMs were forced to have a nomination of someone to automatically become guild leader upon being banned. Upon automatic assignment of the new GM, they could also have to appoint a nominated GM should they also become banned. Of course, two people who got banned together would still kill the guild, but at that point, they'd have already blown their second chance. I wonder if losing your guild leader role upon even a temporary ban could act as a deterrent for rule breaking in general.
I don’t really agree with that. The people affected here are the guild members who had nothing to do with the rule-breaking. Losing an entire guild mainly impacts them, not the person who got banned. Punishments should target the person responsible, not the whole community. That’s actually an interesting idea. The only downside I see is that it adds extra systems and still doesn’t help in existing cases like this one. A simpler approach would be a one-time transfer when a Guild Master is permanently banned, with clear confirmation via their forum account. That way it’s verifiable and doesn’t require ongoing systems or additional rules. The goal is mainly to preserve active guilds without adding unnecessary complexity.
I think that it have the same logic as the existence of ban always banning the IP, affecting* everyone who share your connection too, intentionally*
