Personally, the current group structure makes me anxious to start one because I'm not sure exactly how much control I have over my group as the founder of it. I realy perfer a tierd control system where the founder has absolute control of the group and only the founder can add and remove people from the officer pool. Officers have control over the member being able to add and remove members but can't remove the founder and other officers or the founder.
Ideally though, the founder should be able to set up what permissions the four user tiers have (people are either a non-member, member, officer, or founder in a group). Permissions being things like: invite non-member, add member, add officer, remove member, remove officer, demote officer, demote member, create new proposal, and so on.
Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive
These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE
Removing group recalls |
|
|
odious Wallaby
Tribal Otter
Join date: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 23
|
08-07-2005 04:38
|
|
Shaun Wallaby
Registered User
Join date: 30 Mar 2005
Posts: 7
|
08-10-2005 06:37
I like the idea of a tier system for groups with each tier with it's own name.
------------------------------------- Founder -Able to remove any type of member. -Sets the options for the group. -Promotes/demotes members Officers -Can't remove an active founder -Can vote for a new founder when the founder leaves -Able to terraform group land. Members (High Level) -Members can build on group land without worrying about the timer. Members (Low Level) -Doesn't get dwell bonus money for being in group. -Founder can set group plots so low level members can keep prims on group land with a timer. ------------------------------------------ Having a low level member will be nice to have. A founder can use the low level members for vendors and don't have to worry about lowering the groups dwell bonus money. |
|
Travis Lambert
White dog, red collar
Join date: 3 Jun 2004
Posts: 2,819
|
08-31-2005 10:40
With some preliminary testing on the 1.7 Preview - this discussed change does not seem to be present in preview.
Don - any feedback? Will this feature make it into 1.7? I know groups are long overdue for an overhall, but this one small change in the interim would help a lot of folks. I'd love to be able to group up my mainland parcel to delegate land permissions - but not have to worry about a rogue officer selling the land if that wasn't my intention. For the love of god, pleeeeeease!  _____________________
------------------
The Shelter The Shelter is a non-profit recreation center for new residents, and supporters of new residents. Our goal is to provide a positive & supportive social environment for those looking for one in our overwhelming world. |
|
a lost user
Join date: ?
Posts: ?
|
I agree!
09-05-2005 06:53
Don - I strongly support getting rid of recall elections for 1.7 - with a few caveats: Short-Term: -Get rid of recall elections -Provide some method for the Founder of a group to remove officers -Don't allow the group founder to be removed except via Linden intervention. Long-Term: -Give us multiple group types that better fit common usage -Give us more flexibility with groups & Land Management, such as: ---------Ability to decide who shares what ---------Ability to decide who gets what land permissions ---------Ability to decide who can sell the land (or founder only if so desired) ---------Ability to decide who can return who's objects. Thanks! [/I readily agree with this! Especially these points: Ability to decide who shares what Ability to decide who gets what land permissions Ability to decide who can sell the land (or founder only if so desired) Ability to decide who can return who's objects. ] |