ibtoad610

It was Dale who removed her along with two others for inactivity, your going to have to get a direct answer from him.

Just a couple of things to note Simon:

-Technically the limit for a trial period is 4 weeks, she has been here much longer than that. (obviously this depends on the trial member being active etc.)

-She hasn't attended an event in over 2 weeks.

-She was on the "non-signup" list for the TSC war

I was told RL comes before RS, She's been doing that to support herself.

Edit: She also was not warned she was being demoted.

The only times I have ever seen her on attendance lists was for small thinsg like FoG. And that was rare. I have never seen her at war, on irc, on the forums, or anything. No point in making our ml look more active than it really is...

She cannot access IRC and i have already told you about why she cannot access the forums. Instead of booting them out why dont you remind them about wars and what not when they are on, i seem to remember alot of people not being able to access IRC and Forums yet people go out of their way to remind them.

I'm on dial up, and yes, my net runs very slow most of the time. When I load a web page, I quite frequently lag out. I have a very hard time uploading images (including the sigs I make) and have to spend time loading those, reading forums, and checking other things online before I even log onto rs.

She could have made more of an effort to talk to every one in WG who she saw on rs. How many people did she talk to on a regular basis? I don't recall ever really talking to her.

It is the responsibility of a Trial Guardian to show their activity. If at no other time, the trial should be when they are MOST active.

i saw her at one event, a war like a month ago. She wasn't listening to piles, was sniping when told not to and doing everything you shouldn't do in a matched opt fight......

its not hard to get on forums for 20mins to see whats up and go to ia's and post.

For having looked closely at event attendances for the past month and a half, I can say that her removal doesn't surprise me.

I was just talking to Ibtoad610 in RS.
I feel she has been improperly kicked from WG.

You guys have to sort out the inactivity kick system, at least warn them and make sure they're aware of what is happening

Ibtoad joined march 22 - today date is june 6

3 months of trial? it's supposed to be 1 month of trial then graduate or kicked.
Well it is supposed to be, but we've failed big time on pushing our trials.

Simon wtf dude?
If you're inactive you're kicked.
If you've been over the 1 month trial period, you're kicked.
There is no swaying these rules..

It doesn't matter if its a close friend of yours, don't try and make excuses for an inactive.
Like ok, she may have a reason she's not on irc, but we're talking about event attendance here + trial period.
Not irc activity.

You don't attend events, you get kicked.
You stay 3 months trial, you get kicked (except kero2 ).
Simple as that.

There's one thing I disagree strongly with here and that's kicking someone without saying a word.

To an outsider, that makes them see WG as a clan which doesn't care about the person, just the numbers. Personal respect and moral fibre is much more important than ANY war. They've made an effort to apply, the least you can do is let them know what's going on.

May have been a mistake, but don't make it again.




I came up with the 1 month trial period and I still stand by it as a good test of activity. Simon, as people say, she should've let a council member know. Just as communication is vital from leadership to the member, its also vital the other way around. Co-operation only comes from shared understanding.

Simon, I've got to side with Evil and Dale on this one. She was inactive and that's a fact. You can't deny that. Inactivity, unannounced inactivity no less can't be excused. I mean, people here post inactivity topics when they might not be on the next day...a single day. Sure, RL always comes before RS, but I'm sure she could have done something to inform someone. She could have joined someone's CC while we were massing for a war and just say that she's got some RL problems she's dealing with. Hell, she could have even asked you to do this for her PRIOR to realizing she was kicked.

I don't mean to be rude by this, but if it really means so much to you that she was kicked for reasons she couldn't control (easily I guess) what was stopping you from taking the initiative earlier on and making a short post just stating her problems and that she's unable to access the forums easily and requests some people add her ingame so she's able to contact other people.

Now, given that, I think something the leaders could do is just work a little more with the Trials, I guess this goes for the Application Managers as well. Pay a little more attention to who's inactive and who's running the risk for being kicked. Maybe make a post every other week with a list of name of members who are risking being booted and just say that if anyone can contact these people to let them know what's going on.

Ultimately, it's down to the person in question to do something about the situation. She can get all the notifications she could ever need and have all the reasons for why she's inactive, but if she doesn't do anything to even try to change the circumstances then she can't expect to remain a member.

You can't say she was wrongly kicked, because three months of inactivity is a lot of time and that's a good 90 days to inform ONE person that they've got some things to deal with. If it was of such importance to her to remain in WG, she could have mentioned to you to make a post for her, just saying that she's unable to do this herself and is requesting some people add her in-game so she's able to get information about upcomming events.

She may not have been removed from the list the best way possible, but it wasn't unfair because she had three chances (three months to graduate) and none were taken advantage of.

You have to say, Simon, she deserves to be kicked. The only thing Council have done wrong in my view is not inform her about being on the brink of demotion, but anyway, if she can't access the forums and IRC regularly, what chance did she have of becoming active?

3 Months of trial is simply too long.

Perhaps it might have been better if she raise her case herself with the council, or if she wish, she can choose to make a query by post but its always better to address it directly and in PM. Instead of allowing this snowball into arguments that damage what could have been salvaged possibly, less fire to the bridge, even though the intention of this post was meant well. I'm not disputing the view of seeing this necessary where the want to set things "right" is concerned but I'm sure any of the council will be glad to address it when approached directly.

So, I'm not sure if this serves more as a complaint or an appeal. Or perhaps its both.

But I do not think it will do her much good to have all these critical opinions, be it good or bad, right or wrong escalate like this and she isn't here to address it directly. Maybe she isn't ready or maybe she's more sad about it than to talk about it. IDK for sure. But if she wishes to rejoin, explain, appeal and dedicate her activity in return. She should approach the council directly herself.

Well, I'm personally not for kicking or banning without giving the person a chance to explain, unless they've proven to be totally inactive without a doubt for several weeks by the time of kick - ie. no attendance, no posts, no appearance of any sorts. There's been alot more worse situations where trials simply disappear for several weeks with such profile and there's those who refuse to graduate or takes a very long time to hit quota*. Hence, that's why this 1 month trial condition was put in place then. Extension of trial period sometimes happen but case by case, depending. But it should be with approvals.

Maybe this might have been necessary but I do think it will be a better necessary to have the doer undo it themselves. Given the performance has become very questionable, although not beyond doubt - she posted on 2 June, so stated. If she cannot dedicate the activity quota due to RL, always good to pre-empt rather than to keep quiet about it. Being trial has its purpose to see if the clan suits the person and if the person suits the clan. Give and take.

Otherwise, we can argue about the rights and wrongs, RL definitely > RS - you either balance if its important enough for you to want keep it or you simply just have to let go if you can't.


*Edited - backtrack and info correction

So her connection can handle runescape and not the forums? I thought it would be the other way round

If she can play rs, she can check forums. She wouldn't be able to do both at once, but it is possible.