[OneManWo1fPac]

...And why not just send credits directly to the guild leader then?

Im assuming you married, maybe not but either way. Think about joint bank accounts, instead of the husband directly giving money to the wife, or thenothernway around, they have a bank together which they can both access.

[Intelli]

Rejected, vetoed.

Adds pointless commands that would clutter up the system, for functionality we already have. Not to mention that the Guild 2.0 system only has 1 guild leader.

More information can be found here:
http://minerealm.com/community/viewtopi ... 64#p131064
http://minerealm.com/community/viewtopi ... 10&t=10860

[OZinky]

I would just like to say that it is unfair to reject this idea. It has a 90% vote for it to be implemented and you only need 70% for it to pass. Clearly, most people want this. Now your saying that you can veto it because a different idea (http://minerealm.com/community/viewtopi ... 10&t=10860) you implemented. However, this should not have been implemented because it only has 7 votes and if it doesn't have 20 votes in the first 2 days it should be rejected. Even if vetoes were enacted, the idea states only ridiculous ideas can be vetoed and this isn't ridiculous in any way. I am asking for you to rethink your decision. It would help out many guilds and players.
Thanks,
OZinky

[Intelli]

However, this should not have been implemented because it only has 7 votes and if it doesn't have 20 votes in the first 2 days it should be rejected

That rule is newer. Suggestions used to only need 60% of votes, etc.

[OZinky]

Oops, I didn't know that. But can you please still think it over? I think it would be a great addition to the server.

[SunnyD_Bro]

I still like the idea. And, obviously, a lot of other people do too. I think it's unfair that this is rejected.

[OneManWo1fPac]

im guesssing were back to a dictatorship so our voting system was overturned?

[cubeguy314]

Any disrespect/rudeness is not intended and NEVER will be in any of my posts. My apologies if any offense is taken.

Rejected, vetoed. Counter arguments in red

Adds pointless commands that would clutter up the system, for functionality we already have. I don't see the validity in this argument. What functionality? Wouldn't the new guild system already clutter up the basic, current one we have now?
Not to mention that the Guild 2.0 system only has 1 guild leader.I don't see too much of a point in this argument either... Yes, the guild 2.0 system has 1 guild leader, but that's just one! What if something happens to that one person? Think of the President of the Untied States for example. If something ever happens to him, God forbid, then the Vice President would take over everything that the president was responsible for. Same issue can be reflected with one of the arguments given here.

More information can be found here:
http://minerealm.com/community/viewtopi ... 64#p131064 Could this idea be added to the guild 2.0 system?
http://minerealm.com/community/viewtopi ... 10&t=10860 See arguments made above.

Once again, no intention whatsoever for disrespect. I just want to counter this point with another valid point. Sorry if there is any offense that is taken. If anyone is taking offense to this, especially Intelli whom I've addressed this post to, PLEASE send me a forum message and let me know.

[Pemnan]

This is too good of an idea to be ignored.
#CrowdSourceAndProud

[mr. roach]

Man, I was really looking foward to this. >:L