GreaseMonkey wrote:Moving past all this drama, here's a suggestion I can make:
Overdoing your hierarchy.
Personally, I believe that if a clan starts out with anything more than "leadership", "members", and "preliminary recruits", it's overdoing it. Heck, <@> doesn't even have the "leadership" rank (there's a de-facto leader but that's it).
This might also be regarded as "Overhyping your clan", which could cover more than just this.
Conduit wrote:How about keeping a healthy number of members?
A good number of members can be around 20, right? And if you let a clan get so big, it would be harder to keep a grasp of everything and soon it would quickly fall apart under its own weight.
Trust me on this. :\
I get where you're coming from here, but I'd disagree somewhat. Like Booyo said, a big clan CAN work (and does in USAB's case), but I think it's important to find people you can count on to help take some of the burden. I think a clan with a single leader and no other people helping to manage/organize will fail fairly quickly as the leader gets swamped. If you have people you trust who can help you lead, I dont really see an upper limit to the amount of people a clan can support.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests