Once again, copy-pasted from the ol' blog in hopes to spark up conversation and discussion with one of my favorite MMORPG communities. Usual rules apply: it's long, so the TL;DR crowd be warned, you don't have to read it, or you can help out by bumping it with a typical TL;DR post if you like :P Let's keep it civil, shall we?

_______

I have not invented a "new style," composite, modified or otherwise that is set within distinct form as apart from "this" method or "that" method. On the contrary, I hope to free my followers from clinging to styles, patterns, or molds. Remember that Jeet Kune Do is merely a name used, a mirror in which to see "ourselves". . . Jeet Kune Do is not an organized institution that one can be a member of. Either you understand or you don't, and that is that. There is no mystery about my style. My movements are simple, direct and non-classical. The extraordinary part of it lies in its simplicity. Every movement in Jeet Kune-Do is being so of itself. There is nothing artificial about it. I always believe that the easy way is the right way. Jeet Kune-Do is simply the direct expression of one's feelings with the minimum of movements and energy. The closer to the true way of Kung Fu, the less wastage of expression there is. Finally, a Jeet Kune Do man who says Jeet Kune Do is exclusively Jeet Kune Do is simply not with it. He is still hung up on his self-closing resistance, in this case anchored down to reactionary pattern, and naturally is still bound by another modified pattern and can move within its limits. He has not digested the simple fact that truth exists outside all molds; pattern and awareness is never exclusive. Again let me remind you Jeet Kune Do is just a name used, a boat to get one across, and once across it is to be discarded and not to be carried on one's back.

— Bruce Lee

My history in MMORPG guilds is likely very different from what most people would call "normal". There has been a lot of growing up and assimilation to the MMO culture on my part over the last decade or so, so much that I've been kicked from guilds, in my younger MMO days, for reasons that the "modern me" would crucify someone for today. Currently, I lead, with the help of my best friend, an extremely laid back kinship (guild) in LOTRO full of happy and friendly soloists, crafters and roleplayers. We have been discussing the "ultimate guild" we hope to form when a forthcoming game we are heavily anticipating comes out (if it lives up to the hype, that is) that will represent the culmination of both of our experience, preferences and knowledge we've gained over years of either running or helping to run various guilds in various games. With that in mind, this series of posts, as I get around to them, will represent my thought processes as I come closer to creating the charter for this "ultimate" guild.

Keep in mind, that while I am very very passionate in my views of social rules and realities that make up guilds and guild motivations, this is still an opinion piece, and I'm not stupid enough to think that my rules will work for everyone... but they should! :P

The first thing, I believe, that sets my guild standards apart from the "norm", is I don't look at a guild, as solely an enabler for content access. You don't join a guild to raid, you don't join a guild as you would a professional sports team, and you certainly don't join a guild lightly, with a complete absence of your or their vision in mind. Content access will happen to guilds that are meant for it to happen for in the context of the game you are playing. I firmly believe that, in WoW, one of the underlying messages that goes over a lot of peoples' heads is that "current" raiding (and this could be extended to "all raiding") is a reward for a guild's social cohesion and health within the context of WoW's vision (which I often don't agree with, in the "more=better" aspect). I'm not going to, in this entry anyway, get deep into the fact that raids in WoW are pitched as part of a story intended to be seen by all, but I think that particular detail creates and shoots up the growth of a lot of guilds that just shouldn't exist, let alone feel rewarded with any kind of logistical success. This means that, yes, many people get logistical success, in team content, without the social health to deserve it. This is one of WoW's greatest failings, and a cause of much of their community issues, in my opinion. I blame the "story necessity" of the raid content just as much as I blame the people themselves, but moving on...

The most important ideal in forming or belonging to any guild is that a guild is a circle of friends, and/or potential friends. The second, the moment this is broken, it needs to be addressed, because the point of a guild, like any relationship anywhere, is to offer a "quality of life upgrade" from the solo life. If it doesn't, then the guild has failed you, and either you shouldn't be in it, or it shouldn't exist. Whether you're in the guild because there's good conversation, high activity (don't join *for* content access, but content access is a perk you can enable in a larger group of friends, that's the difference) or just a pleasant atmosphere, if you don't like it there, leave. This is your leisure time, and it shouldn't be a painful thing, at all. And before anyone says it, no, guild perks don't generate an exception, ever.

In the context of this primary ideal, leadership needs to know that no one should ever be in the guild "on a technicality". If you "don't have a good enough reason", or the individual causing unrest or unhappiness hasn't broken any tangible rules, but you (particularly as a leadership figure) still can't make that amicable connection with them, they're out. This judgement should almost always be made, with a "new face", while they hold an initiate rank of sorts, but it shouldn't be limited to that scenario, or simply to initiates. Regardless of what class they play, or what role they serve, never ever leave your guild charter in a state that some idiot pissing off your guild can quote "paragraph three, subsection 2a" to "block you" from kicking them. Just kick them. If that leaves you feeling inconsistent, that's fine, you should never feel bound by consistency or rules to keep someone that "just doesn't fit". It's a subjective call, but the most important call in holding a friendly guild together. To this end, I fully intend to have the charter of our "ultimate" guild state that the most important rule is a positive atmosphere, and a cohesion to what the leadership find to be in accordance with a positive presence in the guild, subjective as that may seem, is the most important responsibility of each individual member. Remember, if guilded life isn't better for you than the solo life, your place in the guild is pointless for you, and for those in that guild.

No one has a "right" to be in your guild. Ever.

Now, I just gave the leadership of this hypothetical guild a tremendous amount of power. I just basically said "if the leadership stops liking you, or doesn't learn to like you in the first place, you're out". This is quite purposeful, because I believe that the best guilds are what I like to call "counseled dictatorships". "Democracy" should never get in the way of the cuts that "just need to be made" for the sake of guild atmosphere. The guild we are intending to form, to this end, will have a leader (my best friend), one officer (myself, who is understood as a "co-leader"), with everyone else being either members or initiates. I believe, very strongly, that empowered membership, and the feeling that anyone can take ownership of their time within the guild to make things happen, are very important. I also believe that if your guild requires an "officer corps", it's too big. If you have so many interpersonal issues that you need a "corps" of people to moderate them, you messed up in recruiting. You took in too many people that won't be adults, that require babysitting, and your guild is too big. Most importantly, the "small government" I envision comes part and parcel with a weight and responsibility to leadership that is self-motivated. No one can demand of the time of the leadership, no one can tap their foot and expect the leadership to go above and beyond in involvement and passion, no one can tell the leadership to "lead right now"... but the leader should feel these things, to an applicable degree for whatever situation, on their own power. If they don't, they should state that up front, so the membership can adjust their priorities and/or loyalty to a guild whose leader has responsibly communicated their loss or change of leadership viability, philosophy or availability. The guild itself is the engine, but the leader is the steering wheel. That direction can very realistically be "we don't do the whole 'serious guild' thing here", because at least it's a stated vision and direction. It actually has been known to work rather well for the right group of people.

I believe that an initiate rank/phase is incredibly important for those "found in the game". I'm big on maintaining guilds formed from RL friends, and being open to having people join that are met in the game, but I make no secret of the fact that those joining our circle from a tangent of being met in the game have an extra step to take. Mutual trust between leadership and membership is the most important virtue, again subjective as it may be, in any guild. The initiate rank/phase (which we intend to reserve for those "found in the game", not RL friends) serves two purposes, in my mind. First, it is a time for the guild to get to know the new face, say hello, chat it up, the usual stuff. What I also, however, place as crucially important in this phase, is that the applying the individual must learn of the guild, learn the way it works, ask questions, and most importantly, get to know the leadership, especially in the scenario I am painting here. To this end, I hope to have profiles of our guild's co-leaders available to be read on a website or forum, as well as an ongoing "introduce yourself" thread for all members. Not to mention, only the leadership will have the ability to invite or promote, which makes for guaranteed "one on one" time with those steering the ship. Initiate phases should never ever be spelled out in a quantifiable length, because you can't put a timer on a personal connection with a guild and its vision, as well as its leadership. If it goes on for "a long time" because the guild leaders are having a hard time finding trust... it should probably end in a polite "you don't fit here, but I'm sure there's a guild for you somewhere", and away the applicant/initiate goes to find a better suiting guild, which is win/win for everyone involved.

Finally (for this installment), I absolutely, unquestionably believe in quality over quantity. This was probably apparent throughout this entry, but I just had to say it. None of my guilds (I have and technically still do hold officer status in WoW and RIFT guilds formed from many of the same friends) "actively recruit", and we hold the view that "if we stay small because we just don't run into many quality, compatible people... then we stay small... and happy", and while that often logistically hurts in WoW (again, I don't agree with WoW's "more=better" slant), we barely feel it, because we are active, self motivated adult players capable of finding outside-guild opportunities. That's that whole "doesn't require a babysitter" thing I was talking about earlier.

That'll do for this installment, look for more guildy musings as we move along!

Thank you for reading!