[Killerconvic]

If yes, state why, and list suggestions. If no, state why not.

[CongressJon]

Depends in what way you mean. Organizational in the way of organizing members into small groups, like with the garden system, you mean?

[Killerconvic]

[CongressJon]

Hm. Put it that way, eh?

Essentially, I feel no real need for it at the moment - we could keep going just fine the way we are, in my opinion.

However!

That does not mean, under any circumstances, that a new organization system wouldn't be for the better of our clan. Still, considering the terms upon which you put the question, I'd say no.

[Star Jedi]

Meh, I'd have to say no. The gardens aren't exactly active, but they are a good way of organizing members. IMO, it's just fine

[ratzaroony]

I voted yes, because gardens dont work. I'm not even in a garden No one ever put me in one, even after I asked numerous times...

[Amateur123]

I voted yes

Seed doesn't need a new rank, but it certainly needs more organization...

first of all, within the clan, we should be split into fairly small gardens (about 4-6 people) that can help one another. They MUST be ACTIVE! I registered for Seed around the time when gardens were practically doing nothing except maybe the manetheran warriors and the ebk. I think gardens should be way smaller than they are now to promote more friendships. If newcomers don't already have a friend in Seed when they join, they're usually just slanted off to the side, mostly ignored. Gardens could even have friendly tournaments with each other and have pretty frequent meetings to preserve the activeness. This is just my idea of how we could make more organization in this clan.

[Cspace]

Just something else to throw out there for discussion:

- Organization cannot really fix activity, it can provide a different chain of command but it cannot make members active or provide eternally active groups. Gardens can have functionality if the members wish to take them somewhere, and really another method of sub-groups would just be refining the system. Along with Gardens we have member-led Mercenary Groups (which really have a similar purpose though are probably more active) and Partners (of which we may make an extension later for general grouping).

Basically the way we have it set up, Gardens divide the clan into manageable sections for the chain of command to have a more defined scope. If they wish to have events they can, that is up to the members and not the organization. If a member wishes to be part of another active group we have other opportunities for that as well (including self-appointed leadership in Mercenary Groups).

- There is virtually no way that we can throw away the Garden system, we could possibly never have a decent system again because of the required reorganization. Ranks, profiles, the Profile Manager, the massive list of members, and our general hierarchy and foundation will all have to change (not to mention the notification to all members, which many email spam filters seem to block).

Additions and changes to the Garden system can possibly be made if necessary, but nothing completely different. Also keep in mind that changing anything like this could become a massive undertaking in various ways (even the seemingly simplest changes).

Addition: There is also a fine line between too little organization and too much organization. When new members begin questioning our system then it is too complex for a gaming clan, and with too much complexity all positions become mutually obsolete due to requirements for too many to be active for a system to work. SeeD was originally set up with flexibility in mind. Gardens provide a scope for leadership, but leadership itself is broad so many more can take care of problems without waiting for someone to become available.

[Killerconvic]

We are a very large group, Cspace, so we'd need a rather complicated organizational method to organize the clan.

[Cspace]

[Jarik C-Bol]

I think that we need minor reagustments to the garden system.

1. remove all the totaly inactive gardens.
by this i mean we need t oremove any garden that has no members that have been active in the past 6 months(ish) this will help elimintate confusion and help with the placement of newer members in gardens that are active.

2. combine/revemp super small gardens.
This alows us to consolidate gardens with only 1 or 2 active members.

I think that this may be as drastic as reverting to the 3 original gardens and disolving (temporaraly) the sub-gardens. the sub gardens could then be reactivated as membership/activity requires.

[Star Jedi]

[Jarik C-Bol]

That's why i think it needs to be reduced to a core and rebuilt slowly.
that way, there are not a bunch of empty gardens lying around to confuse new members.
when i joined, I basicly closed my eyes, pointed, and that was how i chose a garden to request. reason being, there were so many, i didn't know how to chose. with a reduced number of gardens, activity is more posible. (automatic grouping of active members).

[Cspace]

That's why we labeled certain Gardens as Inactive. If a Garden has not been active in a long time it is labeled this way and no new members should be placed in it. When members in these Gardens return, they can transfer to a more active Garden therefore freezing the labeled Gardens and energizing the others (at least that is how it is intended to work). We may need to label more this way because we haven't checked in a while, but this system solves the inactivity problem to the same extent without having to reorganize everything, delete members, or cause confusion with a new or rebuilt system.

If we eliminate the sub-Gardens then we are also eliminating our lower level of leadership requiring the first step to be General... And without grouping there really cannot be anything below General without having a complicated system that will end up becoming obsolete.

Gardens are not really intended for events or anything though. Gardens can function independently and have events and competitions, but the overall purpose is to divide the clan into manageable sections so the scope of every leader is not the entire clan. Also without as many Gardens there would be fewer who are considered leaders, and this will make the leadership a lot narrower and increase the image of power. If we dissolve Gardens and rebuild them it will be a much more massive undertaking than many would think (it isn't just changing the order). Deleting members is not happening though, I promised members that if they join they can remain if they decide to leave Runescape and possibly return later, and I am not going to back down on my word to solve a problem that can be solved otherwise.

Garden activity is not really as important anymore, we have other groups that can renew themselves such as Mercenary Groups and a future Party System which allow members to run and enjoy active sub-groups of SeeD without relying on the leadership to organize groups for them. The Garden system is not really our "Organizational Method" as a whole, it is a means of grouping of which some aspects of our leadership require.

[Jarik C-Bol]

Oh... i hadn't thought of that. well, that clears up why we have the things at all!
that also makes sense about the leadership/power thing. yea... can i change my vote?