1. Joined
    05 Oct '05
    Moves
    61209
    01 Jun '06 13:11
    Why is there a limit of 20 members per clan? With overwhelming interest in UA clan, I'm finding this a pain.

    What is the point here with a 20 member max.? Can it be raised?
  2. Standard memberSmiffy
    SPS CLAN
    Wales
    Joined
    10 May '05
    Moves
    86045
    01 Jun '06 13:34
    i think 20 is fine............
  3. Joined
    05 Oct '05
    Moves
    61209
    01 Jun '06 13:58
    Originally posted by smiffy
    i think 20 is fine............
    I'm sure it's fine, I just don't understand the need for this particular limit. I wasn't looking for a vote really, just some reasoning.
  4. London
    Joined
    28 Sep '04
    Moves
    110329
    01 Jun '06 16:151 edit
    Originally posted by SJ247
    Why is there a limit of 20 members per clan? With overwhelming interest in UA clan, I'm finding this a pain.

    What is the point here with a 20 member max.? Can it be raised?
    http://www.redhotpawn.com/vote/result.php?voteid=4
  5. Joined
    05 Oct '05
    Moves
    61209
    01 Jun '06 16:58
    Originally posted by Freddie2006
    http://www.redhotpawn.com/vote/result.php?voteid=4
    Yes, I've heard of this vote. And, as a clan member suggested, it should have been restricted to clan leaders only.
  6. Joined
    17 Jun '05
    Moves
    9211
    01 Jun '06 17:15
    I don't think it is a good idea. The highest rated clan could just be the one with the most members and I think all clans should have an equalish chance of doing well. If you want more people set up a redhotpawn/redhotporn forum site.

    Keep it at 20.
  7. Joined
    12 Jun '05
    Moves
    14671
    01 Jun '06 18:49
    Originally posted by SJ247
    Yes, I've heard of this vote. And, as a clan member suggested, it should have been restricted to clan leaders only.
    Why?

    (Particularly given that virtually anyone can start a clan at any time.)
  8. Standard memberPocketKings
    Banned from edits
    Grammar dyslexic
    Joined
    20 May '05
    Moves
    11372
    01 Jun '06 19:31
    Originally posted by Will Everitt
    [b]equalish
    ?
  9. Joined
    05 Oct '05
    Moves
    61209
    01 Jun '06 20:58
    Originally posted by Will Everitt
    I don't think it is a good idea. The highest rated clan could just be the one with the most members and I think all clans should have an equalish chance of doing well. If you want more people set up a redhotpawn/redhotporn forum site.

    Keep it at 20.
    While I appreciate your smartassed remark here, you should note that the majority of our members are available to, and/or are taking part in, clan challenges.

    Why should clan leader be the voters with regard to member number? It's the clan leaders that are starting and maintaining the clans.
  10. Joined
    12 Jun '05
    Moves
    14671
    01 Jun '06 21:03
    Originally posted by SJ247
    While I appreciate your smartassed remark here, you should note that the majority of our members are available to, and/or are taking part in, clan challenges.

    Why should clan leader be the voters with regard to member number? It's the clan leaders that are starting and maintaining the clans.
    But that doesn't mean they are the only paying users with a legitimate interest in how big clans are allowed to be.

    If the issue affects how good or bad the site is, every subscriber (at least) should be allowed to vote.

    Besides, as I said, anyone can start a clan.
  11. Joined
    05 Oct '05
    Moves
    61209
    01 Jun '06 22:51
    Originally posted by dottewell
    But that doesn't mean they are the only paying users with a legitimate interest in how big clans are allowed to be.

    If the issue affects how good or bad the site is, every subscriber (at least) should be allowed to vote.

    Besides, as I said, anyone can start a clan.
    Okay, yes, paying users have an interest in the quality of the site.
    How does having a larger or smaller clan affect the quality of the site?

    Adding ten more members to a certain clan is going to ensure it wins every challenge? I don't think so. There are numerous clans with less than 10 members, playing 20 member clans. There are small clans with all high rated members, larger with a range, small with low, etc...
  12. Standard memberrhb
    Ginger Scum
    Paranoia
    Joined
    23 Sep '03
    Moves
    15902
    01 Jun '06 22:54
    Originally posted by SJ247

    Adding ten more members to a certain clan is going to ensure it wins every challenge? I don't think so. There are numerous clans with less than 10 members, playing 20 member clans. There are small clans with all high rated members, larger with a range, small with low, etc...
    Apologies for butting in here... The bigger clan could play many more challenges by spreading the gameload equally throughout the clan - the clan members wouldn't be swamped with games so'd have every chance of being competetive in each challenge.
  13. Joined
    12 Jun '05
    Moves
    14671
    01 Jun '06 23:131 edit
    Originally posted by SJ247
    Okay, yes, paying users have an interest in the quality of the site.
    How does having a larger or smaller clan affect the quality of the site?

    Adding ten more members to a certain clan is going to ensure it wins every challenge? I don't think so. There are numerous clans with less than 10 members, playing 20 member clans. There are small clans with all high rated members, larger with a range, small with low, etc...
    I didn't say it would ensure a clan would win every challenge, although RHB makes a good point.

    There are various ways the number of people in a clan affects the quality of the site. At the moment you already have many members joining three or even more clans; if the clans get too big then the whole system becomes meaningless. (An alternative might be to limit people to one playing clan.)

    The specific reasons are irrelevant, however; once you concede the general point that everyone has an interest in the issue, it becomes hard to defend the idea that only clan leaders should get a vote.
  14. Account suspended
    Joined
    10 Nov '05
    Moves
    17944
    02 Jun '06 09:59
    with he site getting bigger - more people subscribing etc. i think it would be better to increase the clan sizes to about 25, its better than every new member starting his own clan. plus the clans which already have about 20 members won't have any trouble filling another 5 spots if they want to and the clans with about 10 or less members likely don't want to be on the first page of he clan tables anyway so it won't affect them.
  15. Standard memberCrowley
    Not Aleister
    Control room
    Joined
    17 Apr '02
    Moves
    91690
    02 Jun '06 10:13
    The limit was 15/16 at first, if I remember correctly, and was then increased to the current limit.
    Russ always had plans (I think) to increase the clan limit until the clan size vote.

    Maybe it's time to have a new vote?
    Clans have stagnated in any case, perhaps a change like this could create a buzz again...
Back to Top