[ QUOTE ]
Why does this option not exist? I could see possibilities for abuse if this was unlimited, but why not 1 rename token per account?
[/ QUOTE ]
In simple terms, the answer is the SG 'belongs' to all of its members, not just a single person.
@Catwhoorg "Rule of Three - Finale" Arc# 1984
@Mr Falkland Islands"A Nation Goes Rogue" Arc# 2369 "Toasters and Pop Tarts" Arc#116617
Are you sure that remains the case? Sunstorm said this in the base builder forum just before I14 went live:
[ QUOTE ]
The super leader title does not have to denote actual leadership or rank within the SG, consider them mainly to be the key master or owner of the group.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tho I could very easily be wrong, it sounds like they feel that SG's belong to a single individual.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why does this option not exist? I could see possibilities for abuse if this was unlimited, but why not 1 rename token per account?
[/ QUOTE ]
In simple terms, the answer is the SG 'belongs' to all of its members, not just a single person.
[/ QUOTE ]
The SG belongs to the person with the power to kick everyone else. If they dislike the SG so much that they choose to quit that is between that individual and the SG leader. I think this is a brilliant idea.
[ QUOTE ]
Are you sure that remains the case? Sunstorm said this in the base builder forum just before I14 went live:
[ QUOTE ]
The super leader title does not have to denote actual leadership or rank within the SG, consider them mainly to be the key master or owner of the group.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tho I could very easily be wrong, it sounds like they feel that SG's belong to a single individual.
[/ QUOTE ]
While I generally agree with Catwhoorg on this issue and still really hate the whole "super leader" idea it seems that they might as well give the super leader the ability to change the SG name whenever he/she wants.
I mean they've decided to give the person with this position the dictatorial ability to kick whoever they want from the SG with impunity so they might as well let this person also be able to rename the SG as well. What's the point of being the "key master" of the group without having that kind of complete control over it?
Loth 50 Fire/Rad Controller [1392 Badges] [300 non-AE Souvenirs]
Ryver 50 Ele� Blaster [1392 Badges]
Silandra 50 Peacebringer [1138 Badges] [No Redside Badges]
--{=====> Virtue ♀
My view is that the "super leader" is the one who originally came up with the group's name, motto, description, etc. and recruited the first members. This would have to make him/her the most important member, as the group would simply not exist without. If the super leader feels the name should be changed, I see no reason why he/she shouldn't have that ability.
Having said that, it is still up to a good super leader to include the other members in important decisions such as this one so that they're not "Valor Vindicators" one minute and "Pink Potatoes" the next. 
(Exaggerated point, obviously)
EDIT: Grats on 700 badges, btw Lothic!
My Virtue Projects
AE: 38959 - Invasion of the Dark Realm
[ QUOTE ]
My view is that the "super leader" is the one who originally came up with the group's name, motto, description, etc. and recruited the first members. This would have to make him/her the most important member, as the group would simply not exist without. If the super leader feels the name should be changed, I see no reason why he/she shouldn't have that ability.
Having said that, it is still up to a good super leader to include the other members in important decisions such as this one so that they're not "Valor Vindicators" one minute and "Pink Potatoes" the next. (Exaggerated point, obviously)
EDIT: Grats on 700 badges, btw Lothic!
[/ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately the new Super Leader rank wasn't given to the person that founded the SG. Supposedly it was awarded to the highest ranking player that was on last, and there were reports that even then it didn't work that way.
I was one that got the SL position in one SG and I had made a point not logon to that character the day before the ranks were awarded.
Although I wouldn't mind being able to rename a solo SG or an SG that was inherited, I can easily imagine this being abused.
The key problem with this is that you can change superleaders. So a large SG could rename itself many times by changing the superleader to someone else.
That said, I would like the option to rename my supergroup.
It seems like the Superleader rank would make SG renames more feasible, as it would allow one person to be the (figurehead at least) decision-maker of the SG.
Certainly, granting this power would allow a single player to make things unpleasant for the members, but so can kicking, locking enhancement tables, locking permissions, etc. in the wrong hands. If malicious use of SG-renaming is a worry, you have more to worry about in your group.
Bad leadership in a SG suffers consequences though, as the SGleader who mistreats thier members finds themselves in a solo group.
The Superleader who finds himself able to rename the group had better get some group concensus.
Perhaps:
Superleader chooses to use a rename, and clicks on a short form similar to a /petition or bugreport.
All of the of the Rank 5 characters not on the Superleaders account get a popup upon login: "Superleader has decided to rename the group to NewSG-Name. {Vote Yes}/{Vote No} / {Abstain for another day, vote later}"
Depending on permissions, Ranks 1-4 could be added to the voting process.
If a player has multiple alts in the SG, then only the first alt to login gets the popup.
After X period of time, perhaps equal to the demotion time, the votes are counted.
I'm not sure what threshold would/should be enough. Fifty-One Percent? Two-Thirds? Unanimous?
If the threshold is met, the petition is sent, and you eventually should get your rename.
The addition of the super leader rank has introduced a new set of considerations for this issue.
As Forbin_Project mentioned I am also currently a super leader of an old SG that I did not actually create myself. Because this is likely the case in many SGs it makes it questionable whether any current super leader really has the sole right to rename a SG someone else originally named.
On the other hand while I don't like the implications for abuse there really is a reasonable argument that the super leader SHOULD be allowed to do this. After all that person (whether we like it or not) now has the sole ability to affect pretty much everything else about a SG, why not its name as well?
BBQ_Pork had a good idea about how to include the rest of the SG into the rename process. My suggestion for it (which I cooked up several years ago predating the super leader rank) was that any rank 5 leader could propose a new name that would viewable by the SG but it'd be on "probation" for a one week. This would give the rest of the SG a chance to review the new name. Any other member could at any time during that week actively vote it down. If no one during that week voted the new name down then the new name would become the official public name of the SG. This scheme would mean that the entire SG would have to at least not object to the name change which makes it about the fairest method I've seen proposed so far.
But now that we have the super leader deal I reluctantly admit that letting the super leader be able to change it is probably a relatively simple way to accomplish it as well.
P.S. Thanks for the congrats on the 700 badges.
Maybe they should only let the people with the most badges be able to change SG names.
Loth 50 Fire/Rad Controller [1392 Badges] [300 non-AE Souvenirs]
Ryver 50 Ele� Blaster [1392 Badges]
Silandra 50 Peacebringer [1138 Badges] [No Redside Badges]
--{=====> Virtue ♀
[ QUOTE ]
BBQ_Pork had a good idea about how to include the rest of the SG into the rename process. My suggestion for it (which I cooked up several years ago predating the super leader rank) was that any rank 5 leader could propose a new name that would viewable by the SG but it'd be on "probation" for a one week. This would give the rest of the SG a chance to review the new name. Any other member could at any time during that week actively vote it down. If no one during that week voted the new name down then the new name would become the official public name of the SG. This scheme would mean that the entire SG would have to at least not object to the name change which makes it about the fairest method I've seen proposed so far.
[/ QUOTE ]
This makes the assumption that SG's are meant to be run democratically, when in reality with the implementation of the super leader it's more easily a dictatorship. The only difference is the players still have the right of choice(EDIT: in terms of being able to stay or leave the group). A smart leader would probably wield their given power to satisfy the majority, but that's still up to the leader to make those kinds of decisions at this point. For the devs to enforce such rules would take a little away from the freedom of the players to form and run their groups how they see fit.
I do think, however, that there should be something that allows a group to rename itself, but with certain limitations... perhaps giving all new SG's a rename token, and once that token is used that's it, no more are given out. Just one and only one token.
My Virtue Projects
AE: 38959 - Invasion of the Dark Realm
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
BBQ_Pork had a good idea about how to include the rest of the SG into the rename process. My suggestion for it (which I cooked up several years ago predating the super leader rank) was that any rank 5 leader could propose a new name that would viewable by the SG but it'd be on "probation" for a one week. This would give the rest of the SG a chance to review the new name. Any other member could at any time during that week actively vote it down. If no one during that week voted the new name down then the new name would become the official public name of the SG. This scheme would mean that the entire SG would have to at least not object to the name change which makes it about the fairest method I've seen proposed so far.
[/ QUOTE ]
This makes the assumption that SG's are meant to be run democratically, when in reality with the implementation of the super leader it's more easily a dictatorship. The only difference is the players still have the right of choice(EDIT: in terms of being able to stay or leave the group). A smart leader would probably wield their given power to satisfy the majority, but that's still up to the leader to make those kinds of decisions at this point. For the devs to enforce such rules would take a little away from the freedom of the players to form and run their groups how they see fit.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll admit that my idea wasn't thought out in much detail. If the Super-Leader really wanted the name change to be without SG review, he could demote the tier 5's (other than his alts, if any) into the tier 1-4 catagory and set the voting permissions at "Tier 5 only". Truly a jerk move, but within the boundries of the setup.
[ QUOTE ]
I do think, however, that there should be something that allows a group to rename itself, but with certain limitations... perhaps giving all new SG's a rename token, and once that token is used that's it, no more are given out. Just one and only one token.
[/ QUOTE ] I'm pretty agreeable, and I could go with this. However, I can think of at least one older SG (consists of my buddy, myself, and three of his other friends/family) who would like this very much.
So hopefully one token per newly-formed SG (have it only appear in the Super-Leader's pocket after the SG has been open for a while? Or right away?), and one handed out to each existing SG.
Also, a poster named "Skullhead" (might have renamed or might not be around anymore) used to campiagn for SG Renames, as he was unsatisfied with his, and wished to be able to change it without re-forming and losing all that prestige and of course, the base. If he's still around, he'll hopefully swing by here.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
BBQ_Pork had a good idea about how to include the rest of the SG into the rename process. My suggestion for it (which I cooked up several years ago predating the super leader rank) was that any rank 5 leader could propose a new name that would viewable by the SG but it'd be on "probation" for a one week. This would give the rest of the SG a chance to review the new name. Any other member could at any time during that week actively vote it down. If no one during that week voted the new name down then the new name would become the official public name of the SG. This scheme would mean that the entire SG would have to at least not object to the name change which makes it about the fairest method I've seen proposed so far.
[/ QUOTE ]
This makes the assumption that SG's are meant to be run democratically, when in reality with the implementation of the super leader it's more easily a dictatorship. The only difference is the players still have the right of choice(EDIT: in terms of being able to stay or leave the group). A smart leader would probably wield their given power to satisfy the majority, but that's still up to the leader to make those kinds of decisions at this point. For the devs to enforce such rules would take a little away from the freedom of the players to form and run their groups how they see fit.
I do think, however, that there should be something that allows a group to rename itself, but with certain limitations... perhaps giving all new SG's a rename token, and once that token is used that's it, no more are given out. Just one and only one token.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sadly before the super leader rank came along I'd argue that we had the choice to run SGs democratically (with as many 'top' equally ranked leaders as we wanted) OR dictatorially (with only one level 5 leader). Now that the Devs forced the super leader rank on us it's clear they WANT us to be dictatorial about leadership whether we want that or not. The super leader rank effectively LIMITED our ability to run SGs any way we wanted and only really served to make the GMs lives easier, not ours. Just to be clear you do realize that SGs operated well enough for years -before- they added the super leader rank in I13 right?
I still favor my suggested voting approach because it gives everyone a say in the renaming process and it makes as much sense in the "pre super leader" world as it now does in the "post super leader" world. But again I will admit that since the Devs seem to be steering us towards the single Top Boss rank scheme that giving the super leader rank the ability to rename a SG is now probably a fairly expedient way to do it if not the most desirable from a fairness point of view.
If the super leader rank is ever allowed to change SG names they might as well be able to do that as many times as they want. Trying to control it with a "one time" token would complicate the issue. I've seen SGs change hands many times over the years. What happens if one token is used but another new super leader takes over and reasonably wants to change the name again? Besides the Devs have already allowed for the chaos of a single top leader to run amuck and screw everything up about an SG with impunity, why bother limiting how often they could rename it as well?
And obviously anyone can always "vote" their disapproval of a name change by quitting a SG, but hopefully that kind of thing should be done as a last resort in any event dictatorial or not.
Loth 50 Fire/Rad Controller [1392 Badges] [300 non-AE Souvenirs]
Ryver 50 Ele� Blaster [1392 Badges]
Silandra 50 Peacebringer [1138 Badges] [No Redside Badges]
--{=====> Virtue ♀
[ QUOTE ]
Just to be clear you do realize that SGs operated well enough for years -before- they added the super leader rank in I13 right?
[/ QUOTE ]
I've been familiar with SG's since early '08 around I11. What I meant was that the super leader rank is there whether we like it or not, and that it's still up to this leader to decide how the group is run, and that it's still possible to include members in a democratic process, but the final decision still rests on the super leader. That is the current reality of it.
[ QUOTE ]
If the super leader rank is ever allowed to change SG names they might as well be able to do that as many times as they want. Trying to control it with a "one time" token would complicate the issue. I've seen SGs change hands many times over the years. What happens if one token is used but another new super leader takes over and reasonably wants to change the name again? Besides the Devs have already allowed for the chaos of a single top leader to run amuck and screw everything up about an SG with impunity, why bother limiting how often they could rename it as well?
[/ QUOTE ]
All very valid arguments. I'm taking the limit stance because there must be some reason the devs haven't implemented this option into the game; some kind of potential abuse I'm guessing. So I say we can take small steps to improve the situation. 
I agree though, unlimited will be much more convenient in the end, I'm just afraid of pushing it that far right away.
My Virtue Projects
AE: 38959 - Invasion of the Dark Realm
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just to be clear you do realize that SGs operated well enough for years -before- they added the super leader rank in I13 right?
[/ QUOTE ]
I've been familiar with SG's since early '08 around I11. What I meant was that the super leader rank is there whether we like it or not, and that it's still up to this leader to decide how the group is run, and that it's still possible to include members in a democratic process, but the final decision still rests on the super leader. That is the current reality of it.
[ QUOTE ]
If the super leader rank is ever allowed to change SG names they might as well be able to do that as many times as they want. Trying to control it with a "one time" token would complicate the issue. I've seen SGs change hands many times over the years. What happens if one token is used but another new super leader takes over and reasonably wants to change the name again? Besides the Devs have already allowed for the chaos of a single top leader to run amuck and screw everything up about an SG with impunity, why bother limiting how often they could rename it as well?
[/ QUOTE ]
All very valid arguments. I'm taking the limit stance because there must be some reason the devs haven't implemented this option into the game; some kind of potential abuse I'm guessing. So I say we can take small steps to improve the situation.
I agree though, unlimited will be much more convenient in the end, I'm just afraid of pushing it that far right away.
[/ QUOTE ]
Democratic Centralism for teh win!
It worked for the Soviets, I'm sure it'll work for this game too...
Anyway my take is that the Devs already made the mistake of slapping the super leader thing on us after 4+ years of things being cool enough without it. It's basically a little too late for them to be worried about the "potential abuse" from the genie they've already let out of the bottle so to speak.
I clearly don't like the super leader idea, but now that we have it we might as well -really- have it. 
Loth 50 Fire/Rad Controller [1392 Badges] [300 non-AE Souvenirs]
Ryver 50 Ele� Blaster [1392 Badges]
Silandra 50 Peacebringer [1138 Badges] [No Redside Badges]
--{=====> Virtue ♀
I've read that our character's name is an intrinsic part of their identification within the databases. And that that makes changing a character name much more complicated than just rewriting a string in a field. (I don't know WHY it's that much more complicated, that just how I saw it explained, second hand from a moderator.) Thus we aren't allowed to casually change our character names.
It may be a similar situation with SG names. It may actually be a fairly big deal to change the name of a SG, so they can't allow it willy-nilly. There's no practical way to charge for a SG rename the way they do for a character rename, but they could still put a time limit on the frequency or something to keep people from overloading the database with SG renames.
/signed for Super Leader being able to rename the Group.
Why does this option not exist? I could see possibilities for abuse if this was unlimited, but why not 1 rename token per account?
Example of how this would be useful is in my own situation... I could not for the life of me come up with a good name for the group, and believe me it took several days before I said screw it and came up with something half-way decent just to start earning some prestige and building my base. Now I've got the perfect name (amazingly not taken by any other group) and the only way to use it is to make a new SG. The only problem is I've poured several months worth of work into this one in order to build my base up before I started recruiting members. Looking back I probably should have waited longer to come up with the name, but at the same time many obstacles encountered through poor planning can be fixed (character renames, server transfer, respecs, tailor shops, etc.). So again, why not at least 1 SG rename token per account?
My Virtue Projects
AE: 38959 - Invasion of the Dark Realm