Number of clubs per leader

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

No. Not sure how you would get from what I posted to that.

@divegeester said
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?

No reply.

@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...)

I think lack of interest in some clubs does not depend on how many clubs one person captains. It depends on the participants. The lack would be there, no matter who was captain.

@moonbus said
I think lack of interest in some clubs does not depend on how many clubs one person captains. It depends on the participants. The lack would be there, no matter who was captain.

I concur.

What is the purpose of a club?
Is it to provide a meeting place for individuals with a common interest apart from chess? I did some research on the site some years ago, and found that out of 250-odd clubs less than 20 had had a forum post in the last 3 months.

If that's not the purpose, is it to show solidarity with a particular poster or group of posters, a kind of fan club? Presumably the number of "followers" is a validation for the club promoter/leader. Or is it a wish to exclude particular individuals from the discussion? Both of these have the same polarising effect as a political silo, in that you never engage with opinions and activities other than those of your limited perspective.

Fewer forums would IMHO be a good thing. If I can't have that, then I'd like to see private forums treated like public threads and closed after 60 days of inactivity.

@kewpie said
What is the purpose of a club?
Is it to provide a meeting place for individuals with a common interest apart from chess? I did some research on the site some years ago, and found that out of 250-odd clubs less than 20 had had a forum post in the last 3 months.

If that's not the purpose, is it to show solidarity with a particular poster or group of posters, a kind of fa ...[text shortened]... n I'd like to see private forums treated like public threads and closed after 60 days of inactivity.

Clubs are also outlets for private tournaments.
At least 2 clubs to my knowledge thrive on private tournaments with little ,or no forum activity but I can't think why a person would want to set up more than 1 club for this purpose.

@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

Sir, are you suggesting that mob rule would be better than considerate governance by an evolved aristocracy?

@kevin-eleven said
Sir, are you suggesting that mob rule would be better than considerate governance by an evolved aristocracy?

I would favor a benign and enlightened philosopher king.


Long live The Russ !

@kewpie said
What is the purpose of a club?
Is it to provide a meeting place for individuals with a common interest apart from chess? I did some research on the site some years ago, and found that out of 250-odd clubs less than 20 had had a forum post in the last 3 months.

If that's not the purpose, is it to show solidarity with a particular poster or group of posters, a kind of fa ...[text shortened]... n I'd like to see private forums treated like public threads and closed after 60 days of inactivity.

Agreed.

@venda said
Clubs are also outlets for private tournaments.
At least 2 clubs to my knowledge thrive on private tournaments with little ,or no forum activity but I can't think why a person would want to set up more than 1 club for this purpose.

Certainly, why would someone want two clubs for the purpose. Pointless.

@divegeester said
Russ,

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

Thanks

Because you want to limit everyone except you want more for yourself?

For every club and clan created there are many more abandoned.

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

You 'believe' in a great many things, mostly about other people, and most of them are wrong.

@divegeester said
Russ,

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

Thanks

Could you specify your reasons for wishing to run more than one Club?

@suzianne said
You 'believe' in a great many things, mostly about other people, and most of them are wrong.

To be fair, a lot of people do that.

@kevin-eleven said
Could you specify your reasons for wishing to run more than one Club?

There was once a club devoted entirely to gambit tournaments. I can imagine clubs devoted to other quite specific topics. And why should not one person have multiple specific interests, with clubs devoted to them ?