Interguild messenger

[Aislinn]

if you think anyone in your guild should be able to use #gm, then you're arguing the wrong case. there are guilds who do not do this, and use #jc guild for chat. #gm is only for announcements. (I've been in one of them. have you?)

now, since you're arguing the wrong thing... stick to the real topic. that is, why should you be able to use #ig if you can't use #gm

The topic is to raise #ig to 10 (i believe that is the original posters suggestion). Which does make the trustworthy issue part of the topic.

Why have people in your guild that you don't trust how they speak and represent you, that can't be allowed to have "speaking privileges"?

I see no point at all in having any restrictions on #gm or #ig...if you have issues, these people should not be in your guild.

[Tanyia]

I request that you read my last post again. I believe somewhere in there I stated that I could see a reason for adding a rank requirement to #ig.

[RolandR1]

yes i believe every guild member should be able to ig because it gets annoying w/o it!!

[Ornitorrinco]

raise it to rank 19 so only the leaders can talk. some guilds has tons of annoying begging ppl who spam in #ig

[Learner]

raise it to rank 19 so only the leaders can talk. some guilds has tons of annoying begging ppl who spam in #ig

If a guild is receiving too much spam from another, just #ig_block the guild until their guild master fixes their problem.

[ttlanhil]

raise it to rank 19 so only the leaders can talk. some guilds has tons of annoying begging ppl who spam in #ig

actually, a leaders only version would be good... your guild leaders can contact the guild leaders of some other guild. only those 19+ (or 15, 17, whatever) can send, and only they can see them.

 

but that'd be in addition to the #ig we already have

[Arnieman]

AS I SEE IT:

 

There are people you trust to be guild members - but you don't necessarily trust them with the guild ownership, representing the guild to other guilds, recruitment, or managing any affairs of the guild (other than just being a nice person to chat/work with). Under the logic of "if you don'f trust people with <blank>, why have them in the guild?", why shouldn't everyone in every guild be rank 20? You just naturally trust people in different ways.

 

This is kind of a case of art imitating life. Some people, you like to talk to, but would never trust them with $20. Others, you'd trust them enough with a loan, but you'd never let them drive your car/bicycle/other private mode of transit. Then, there are the close friends/family you may trust with your very life. You don't trust them all the same, but you don't outright reject them all for it.

 

Personally, I think the #IG should require at least the same rank required for #GM - if not more. Maybe there should be a way to flag a members rank in a guild when they talk to another guild, so as say someone in another guild could see that this person talking is either a leader or just a member. Also, if the leaders (rank 19/20?), also had a separate command to talk only with the leaders of another guild, that could also relieve some of the interguild diplomatic pressure that can be tied to #IG.

 

One more thing - if #IG needs a rank 1, why not set rank to 0 of such offenders?

[Acelon]

Why doesn't #ig be assigned to a rank not currently used? Like 6 or 7? That way those ranks actually have meaning.