Number of clubs per leader

Russ,

Would you consider subscribers being permitted to lead more than one Club please?

Thanks

@divegeester

In fact I think one club and one clan should be sufficient for each and every one.

@ponderable said
@divegeester

In fact I think one club and one clan should be sufficient for each and every one.

Please can you provide your reasons for this quite specific limitation?

Some rationale:

Clans and Clubs serve different purposes.
Clan leadership must be limited to 1 for obvious reasons.
Clubs on the other hand don’t compete in chess leagues or ladders
Clubs are also highly topic related so it is quite likely that someone may want to lead a club on more than one topic.

At this point I cannot see a reason why one person could not lead more than one club.

@ponderable said
@divegeester

In fact I think one club and one clan should be sufficient for each and every one.

Ok my reasons:

* There are very few active clubs. If a club is active it has (per my definition) more than one active poster. If several active posters are there one can take the lead who has not another club to lead. (Here would come the suggestion to enable the burial of old clubs)
* A rationale of different clubs is different focal points. However there are very few clubs which actually thrive on their focus. So the most active clubs I am member of have no focus, while the one with an expresse focus are mainly inactive. I myself tried to activate the philosophy club with not toomuch success. People are mainly here for chess I presume. So the point is if a focus is important neough to creat yet another club, and you can't do it, since you are bound to another capatinship. You have now two ways to deal with that: give up a captainship (you'll need a person willing to take up the captaincy) or to ask one of the peopleyou feel will be an active member of a club to do it. (Here would be the suggestion to be able to bury unactive clubs).
* Another problem: If you besome inactive now (for any reason) you hang one clan and one club. If you have several clubs the problem multiplies.

*So in fact the club landsacpe is filed with inactive clubs. I don't see any urgent need to add to the graveyard. Probability is high to very high, that if you establish one new club you willadd one to the graveyard. If you are able to establish three, I am nearly open to guarantee that you are unable to sustain more than one over a longer period of time. (In most clubs, wehre I am a member I had the last post, and most of them are beond 100 days...)

You are both right.

So...if a club goes one year without a post it should be erased completely by the admins.

@ponderable said
Ok my reasons:

* There are very few active clubs. If a club is active it has (per my definition) more than one active poster. If several active posters are there one can take the lead who has not another club to lead. (Here would come the suggestion to enable the burial of old clubs)
* A rationale of different clubs is different focal points. However there are very few ...[text shortened]... me. (In most clubs, wehre I am a member I had the last post, and most of them are beond 100 days...)

A long post just to say that you don’t like inactive clubs. What difference to your site experience will it make if there are more or less “inactive clubs”. What difference will it make to you or anyone if there is one more?

Have you got a legitimate reason why someone shouldn’t manage 2 clubs or are you just concerned about a few more bites out of Russ’ server?

@contenchess said
You are both right.

So...if a club goes one year without a post it should be erased completely by the admins.

Who cares how long a club is inactive?

Seriously what concern is it of a poster like Ponderable as to how many inactive clubs there are?

You're right...it shouldn't matter if it's a club.

@contenchess said
You're right...it shouldn't matter if it's a club.

It’s clique bias in my honest opinion.

@divegeester said
It’s clique bias in my honest opinion.

Would that be called what the majority want?

Can always have a Vote and see what the majority of people want, right?

-VR

@very-rusty said
Would that be called what the majority want?

Can always have a Vote and see what the majority of people want, right?

-VR

So the usual 30 regulars vote...big deal 🙄
20 of them are in the Ghost club and they vote as a group.

Website votes should go to every user.

@contenchess said
So the usual 30 regulars vote...big deal 🙄

Website votes should go to every user.

Russ can't make people to vote. Especialy if those people never visit the Forum, but are here to play chess.

@ponderable said
Russ can't make people to vote. Especialy if those people never visit the Forum, but are here to play chess.

A pop up or something.

Not that hard.

I don't think this one vote is that serious but if you look at past votes you basically have the same 30 regulars or less.

@contenchess said
So the usual 30 regulars vote...big deal 🙄
20 of them are in the Ghost club and they vote as a group.

Website votes should go to every user.

I am not sure if you are right on the number of regulars but sounds like you could be close.

You don't think the 20 in Ghost Club have a mind of their own?

This only affect people who actually use the clubs would it not?

Someone who doesn't get involved in conversations or rarely look at the "Site Ideas Forum" wouldn't even know about it. Especially new people who just joined.

I don't know if you noticed but Metallica's present Clan Leader said he was in the clan a few months before he realized there was a Clan Forum?

I know we have more than 30 subscribers between paying and non-paying.

-VR