Guild Charter

Messages for the Thieves' Guild
User avatar
jaimie lachlan
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 2:08 pm
Guild: Thieves
Temple: H/Priest of Nature

Guild Charter

Post by jaimie lachlan »

Hello Thieves!

Seems we are now able to dissect and dissasemble the Guild Charter in regards to how our Guildmaster and Guild Officers are elected and serve terms. We already have such a charter in place. However, if you wish to discuss changes or voice any opinions please feel free to post in this string and we can work them out before I send in our final draft. You may also send any thoughts or concerns to me here: iasonbroc@aol.com.

Our revisions are due by the end of the month, so don't hesitate in letting me know what you'd like to see changed, or keep.
The Pirate King
Jaimie Lachlan
Captain of the first rate ship, "The Grimwave"
HIgh Priest of Nature, Duke of Thunder



Image
Badon
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Guild Charter

Post by Badon »

Jaimie - could you post the current charter for our consideration?

Badon
User avatar
jaimie lachlan
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 2:08 pm
Guild: Thieves
Temple: H/Priest of Nature

Re: Guild Charter

Post by jaimie lachlan »

Alright Thieves. Here is our current "charter" on Election Procedures. It's pretty straight across the board, and is what most all guilds use. What about it would you change?


Election Procedure:
Elections will occur once a year with a re-certification period after 6 months. If the GM leaves, then an emergency election will be started. Any GM that abuses their powers against policy will be removed immediately with an investigation afterwards.


Nominations:
1. Self-Nominations should be submitted/posted on these boards
2. You must provide a plan of action for your potential term
3. You have from DATE 12AM eastern until DATE 6PM eastern
4. You must be in the Thieves’ Guild
5. You must be able to complete a full term in office
6. All OGC policies must be followed
7. You CANNOT be a GM in any other guild at the same time as this guild. This means that you should NOT run for a position as GM in more than one guild.


Voting:
1. You must be a subscribed member of the Thieves' Guild
2. You must be at least 21 years old
Note: Voting will occur via the in-game Guildvote functionality
Guildvoting will consist of One Thief / One Vote


In regards to Guild Officers.
Having a GL is at the discretion of the current GM. And the GM can either "appoint" one or choose to have an election for those Thieves who wish to run and put forth their nominations. The procedure for that is as follows:

Nominations:
1. Self-nominations to be submitted to these boards
2. You have from DATE to DATE midnight GMT (generally 7 real world days or full week)
2. You must obviously be a thief, preferably in good standing
3. You must be subscribed throughout the entire term.

Voting:
1. You must be a subscribed member of the Thieves' Guild
2. You must be at least 21 years old
Note: Voting will occur via the in-game Guildvote functionality
Guildvoting will consist of One Thief / One Vote
The Pirate King
Jaimie Lachlan
Captain of the first rate ship, "The Grimwave"
HIgh Priest of Nature, Duke of Thunder



Image
Badon
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Guild Charter

Post by Badon »

Intriguing. I encourage all Thieves to peruse the scrolls here: viewtopic.php?f=170&t=1599

There is a lot more to this change than I had been led to believe - so we should not simply endorse the existing charter out of the desire for a quiet life.

It seems we need to take a view on:

1. Nomination of GM
2. Nomination of GL's and whether the GM should be able to appoint
3. Criteria to Vote/Number of Votes per Thief
4. Term of GM/GL service
5. Ability to call a vote of confidence on the GM
6. Ability to evict members (currently under review by the powers that be)
7. Dealings with Patrons - how we obtain and/or approach one?

regards, Badon
User avatar
Jericho
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2016 1:50 am
Guild: Thieves

Re: Guild Charter

Post by Jericho »

Thank you, Lord Pirate for bringing this opportunity to our attention and for reposting the current charter.

I notice that the Guild Charter sets elections to be observed in tradition with the Eastern Shores, but I believe GMT to be more appropriate. Most other events in the realms operate off of it and in the past we’ve held elections at GMT with no problem or confusion. Aside from that nitpicking observation, the current terms seem fair to me, and I see no need to alter them but I would be interested in hearing any thoughts that others may have.

As contained a system or charter as this may appear to be though, crafty thieves have found ways to game it to their advantage in the past. I’d personally disavow any manipulation of elections within our house, but it’s hard to disapprove of those cunning enough try. Issues that I can recall people having had in the past surround elections:

i. Young unknowns or unproven thieves have entered from the sidelines in the past. Their sudden reemergence has unfortunately changed the outcome of elections. I don’t think that there are ways around this, and all things considered having a cut off of twenty-one seems to be the extent that we can moderate elections.

II. A Guildmaster’s discretion over the appointment or election of officers. One thing that I appreciate about the Thieves is that we give lenience for the Guildmaster to take the guild in the direction that the sitting Guildmaster sees fit. It makes sense to me that leadership would reflect the traditions of their term should represent. Maintaining a Guildmaster’s level of sovereignty while maintaining the position seems important to me, despite its potential frustrations. This tradition considered, I wonder aloud, should there be an articulated protocol for the dismissal of Guild Lieutenants? How should we respond to our patrons involvement in our appointments and dismissals?

Jericho, The Silver Tongued
(Edited to note that I posted this before seeing the Lord Badon's thoughts, and will reply at a later date given the new information provided)
rath
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 2:09 pm

Re: Guild Charter

Post by rath »

One vote per premium account. I like the idea of having our guild staggered and not exactly at the same time as other guilds.
User avatar
jaimie lachlan
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 2:08 pm
Guild: Thieves
Temple: H/Priest of Nature

Re: Guild Charter

Post by jaimie lachlan »

Excellent points, Thieves.

This charter is 'old' so revisions are certainly in order with the changes that are going to occur per the powers that be regarding Guilds, and their management.
I agree all voting time lines should reflect GMT, so I will amend that. Thank you for pointing that out Jericho, and it's always good to see you.

Yes, Badon, you make several excellent points.
* Nominations of a GM seem pretty straight forward. And as fair as I can see it. I am unsure how we would change this - suggestions?
* Appointment of GL - I agree with Jericho on this. A GM should have a say on who is working with them. If more than one Thief expresses interest in serving as a GL, then the GM has that option to open a nomination and voting period. That to me seems fair. If just one wishes to serve, why waste time on such procedures and the GM then just makes the appointment.
* I agree with the One Thief/One Vote ideal. And I would really like it to reflect PER REGISTERED ACCOUNT. (nice catch Rath) I too, find the ability of some to stack votes to benefit their election underhanded, and a form of "cheating."
* A Vote of Confidence has already been established by Staff (6 months into a GM's term) in which any Thief (registered) may call for. My two cents expands that to this: the VOC then must have it seconded by another Thief (registered) in which to move forward on said VOC. --- Thoughts?
* Eviction of Guild Members is something Staff is currently working on, and we shall get more information I am sure. So I'd prefer to leave it out of the Charter for now. We all follow the basic TOS rules so let's keep that in there as is until official change comes from Staff.
* And lastly Patrons. Ours (Vespers) is still AWOL, yet listed I know. However, Silk is readily available if we have issues. As they are short staffed, I am sure any staffer on hand would be gracious enough to facilitate the Guild if a problem arises that needs their attention.

Thoughts on these?
The Pirate King
Jaimie Lachlan
Captain of the first rate ship, "The Grimwave"
HIgh Priest of Nature, Duke of Thunder



Image
User avatar
Kridin
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 8:15 am
Guild: Thieves

Re: Guild Charter

Post by Kridin »

Just my own opinion here, and not directed towards anyone in particular but just a general feeling of how it sometimes goes as of late..

I do not like the term length of a year, especially with the current population of the lands as it stands. I am 50/50 on the free play for GMs, as I feel it promotes people returning just long enough during election times to run - sometimes unopposed - and gain the free account. They then seem to fall either into heavy inactivity, or do nothing at all for the guild. They are simply there to reap that reward, not to try to improve anything.

In terms of term lengths..I really think it should fall into 3 month quarterly blocks. This would prevent the need for a "vote of confidence" completely, as each election system would act as just that. If the GM is active and doing what the members feel is a good job, then they are likely to be reelected. I do not feel this should only relate to this guild, but ALL guilds. However, my opinion does not have any weight on those other guilds.

On the vote of confidence problem: At times, in almost any given guild..there aren't enough members to call for a proper vote of confidence. It's a problem, much like elections themselves, where votes seem to come out of nowhere from highly inactive members who return just to support the person they know OOC, and then are rarely if ever seen again during the entire period. Again - not just for this guild - this seems to be a problem that sways elections and votes. A system should be put into place to fix this, and I feel it's more required than just the "one vote per account" system. You should only be able to vote for your particular guild if you're at least somewhat active in it.

I'm all for the appointing of GLs.. A GM will work better with someone they know. However, if by some chance a GL is just doing a horrible job representing the guild, the guild should be able to call for their removal outside of going to the GM who is likely to defend them.
Badon
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Guild Charter

Post by Badon »

I am still mulling over my feedback. I was only highlighting the posts from Raislin for us to consider.

My thoughts are all on the basis that the GM should be constantly held accountable to the guild and is subject to a vote of confidence at anytime rather than every six months. However, as a quid pro quo for this hanging over them - they should not have their hands tied in terms of tradition or constraints built into our charter.

On the detailed points:

1. GM Nominations
- Self Nomination/Nomination by others - I think we should be able to nominate the 'humble' rather than those with utter self confidence who throw their hat in the ring themselves. They can always refuse to run. If a Thief receives two nominations from others - I suggest their name is added to the ballot subject to their agreement.

- the 'plan of action' - this I think we strengthen so nominees have to put real thought and effort into it with a better structure as to their vision for the guild and what they intend to do, by when in order to be held to account. I think every plan I've seen in other guilds follows the same format of empty words about 'more hunts' and something about more 'RP'. I'm not sure what this 'RP' is. I am more interested in understanding 1) how the prospective GM will further the reputation of our Guild; 2) what activities they intend to undertake in relation to other cities and guilds; 3) how they will gain further favour from the gods given the changes contemplated in relation to Patrons; 4) what they intend to do with the hoarded tithe and gold for our mutual advantage.

Anyone referring to 'more RP' within this forum should be struck from the ballot as unsuitable.

- One Thief/One Account/One Vote/Age 21 - I see no reason to change this as it has served reasonably well to date. Our main issue has been a lack of GM candidates in the past willing to run.

- I would add in more detail to GM Nominations at this stage as well in regards to campaigning. I've seen other weaker guilds such as the Knights determine that there should be no campaigning. I think we should actively encourage a battle of wits in an election. Guile, trickery, and force of will are all values we should hold dear if it gains personal advantage. Let us embrace our heritage and have a more entertaining campaign between candidates to judge their abilities. Persuasion, bribery, blackmail should all be permissible. Indeed, with the possible exception of no poison or assassination of rivals (although if you are weak enough to fall victim to a poisoner or assassin, perhaps you were not of the calibre to lead us in the first place) - all bets are off.

2. GL Nominations
- In accordance with the introduction - we should allow the GM the right to appoint, or run an election at their discretion. However, this is with the threat of removal based on a vote of confidence.

If they were to appoint poorly or show poor political judgement - let the guild's decision hang over them to keep them honest and effective.

3. Vote of Confidence:
- We should stop the six month cycle here and have it able to be triggered at anytime. If I read Raislin's suggestions correctly then he had contemplated 'A Vote of Confidence may be triggered by 3 members of the guild. It shall run for 1 week under simple majority vote'.

I suggest we adjust this to four members (with the same caveat of One Thief, One Vote as per voting) as we do not want things to be too volatile - but keeping things exciting will be interesting.

I also suggest that if we find ourselves entering into a cycle of removal/reappointment - we move for a charter review.

4. Patrons - I read this section of Raislin's post with interest. viewtopic.php?f=170&t=1602

For me, we should not simply sit with Silk and Vespers as it has always been.

We should seek to bargain and gain further advantage from all Kings, Heroes and Immortals of the realm. While I appreciate Silk and Vespers have a natural affinity with our order - let us press for more blessings upon our members where we can. I spent many, many years gaining the confidence of King Jarenmar - so it is not beyond the wit of man for us to go further. This Merchant of Tranos, Mirynna seems a likely candidate to gain the confidence of. While historically, Nefiris had allied us with King Croft (although I assume this alliance is long dead given the latest developments between Jaimie and Croft).
Badon
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Guild Charter

Post by Badon »

Kridin wrote: Tue Jul 11, 2017 7:48 pm I'm all for the appointing of GLs.. A GM will work better with someone they know. However, if by some chance a GL is just doing a horrible job representing the guild, the guild should be able to call for their removal outside of going to the GM who is likely to defend them.
My personal view is we look to hold the GM accountable for their decisions. If they refuse to grasp the nettle of managing the GL out or mentoring them to change, let them be removed from office instead. I'd suggest the terms of GL's are made clear that they end with the GM's term in office (however it comes to an end).

Badon

Return to “Thieves' Guild”