GM PSA: Protect your legacy

QueenMisi

I own Rose Guilds, a group of 5 social guilds on PC EU. We have 5 GMs holding the 5 guilds, and each GM has Admin rank in the other 4, with all perms. We also have officers, leaders and 3 tiers of donors

Sadly, two months ago, one of our GMs died. Despite having proof of death, we had to wait 60 days for ZOS to accept a ticket transferring the guild to a former, retired GM. In the meantime, the guild went inactive on Guildfinder, so it's not been easy to manage recruitment, but we've worked hard on it. Traders have been hired, MOTDs updated, and the experience for the guild members has been business as usual

Today, after the 60 days is up, ZOS has transferred the guild - to a mid-tier donor. They have skipped over the admins, officers, leaders and even the highest rank of donor, handing over the guild and the 9-figure bank balance to someone who has never had access to the guild bank gold. Apparently this is 'the next eligible person due to their activity and rank' - I genuinely don't see how they have come to this conclusion. We are now waiting to see if the person logs in, and hoping that they will hand control of the guild back to us

So I urge my fellow GMs to put something in place so that. if you are incapacitated, your guild can carry on

Arunei

Reply to whatever is your latest response from them and tell them they transferred ownership to the wrong person.

TaSheen

Perhaps you should contact support again about this, especially if this person doesn't log in soon - or if s/he logs in only long enough to wipe the bank?

@ZOS_GinaBruno
@ZOS_Kevin

QueenMisi

The message they sent very specifically says it has to be the randomer, but if we like we can ask the randomer to ask them to transfer it to someone else

And don't worry, I RAN to that bank to transfer the gold out 😁

TaSheen

QueenMisi wrote: »

The message they sent very specifically says it has to be the randomer, but if we like we can ask the randomer to ask them to transfer it to someone else

And don't worry, I RAN to that bank to transfer the gold out 😁

OH GOOD! Gosh, what a bollixed setup though.... I don't know how it is now, but back when I had guilds on various realms in WoW, I got to pick and choose who to turn them over to when I wound up quitting the game.

KCMail

To add some extra context our Admins and most officers are active daily. 1 admin and multiple officers have no guild ownership so it was not impossible to hand it to someone who actually has been leading the guild or promoted by our dear friend who sadly passed.

QueenMisi

TaSheen wrote: »

OH GOOD! Gosh, what a bollixed setup though.... I don't know how it is now, but back when I had guilds on various realms in WoW, I got to pick and choose who to turn them over to when I wound up quitting the game.

That's the thing, we've had GMs come and go over the years, but because she died unexpectedly, there was no way of transferring it. Her family were lovely, her son is a gamer and he tried to log in to her account but he couldn't find the password

Danikat

That's such a strange decision for them to make.

I've been in Winter Rose for a few years (not very active, sorry!) so I know how well organised the guilds are and that there's always a good coverage of leader, admins and officers. It's one reason I've stayed so long, good organisation makes a big difference. I also know that the ranks are clearly labelled and in order. (I've been in some guilds where there's odd specialist 'admin' ranks lower down the list.)

I could kind of understand if ZOS said they couldn't transfer a guild to the person who made the request, or even a person nominated in the request, to prevent guilds being stolen. But I can't believe they genuinely couldn't find any compatible people above the mid-tier donor ranks to give it to.

TaSheen

Well, I do hope everything turns out the way you want/need it, and I am sorry about the death of your friend and GM. May your guilds live long and prosper (sorry, I just love to steal that quote sometimes!)

QueenMisi

TaSheen wrote: »

Well, I do hope everything turns out the way you want/need it, and I am sorry about the death of your friend and GM. May your guilds live long and prosper (sorry, I just love to steal that quote sometimes!)

Thank you

OrangePandas

So instead of considering who has permissions or ranks in a guild, they'll just give it a total random person and be like 'GG'? How is a random member the one most eligible based on rank and activity and not the members who are actually actively doing the guild admin with high ranks?

It's disgraceful. Even more so with the circumstances of why you need to transfer leadership via support. Talk about kicking when already down.

There are few guilds like Roses on PC EU. Seriously wishing you the best of luck! I hope they see sense and you don't have to rely on a random person being kind enough to return the guild.

IDespiseYouAll

One of the guild's officers here. (not the specific guild, just rose in general)

The fact that ZOS has come to the conclusion that, out of all the GMs/officers that are clearly ranked within the guild, not just on discord. The ownership of a years-old guild would go to a normal member is ridiculous. This isn't just a slap in the face to the people who have built the community in that guild, but also to the community of that guild itself. The guild they've helped create a community in and have made friends in is now at risk of being purged/deleted by a potentially nefarious member. That is, if they even notice the problem at all. (let's be real, we're all guilty of insta deleting guild mails from time to time)

Snamyap

OrangePandas wrote: »

So instead of considering who has permissions or ranks in a guild, they'll just give it a total random person and be like 'GG'? How is a random member the one most eligible based on rank and activity and not the members who are actually actively doing the guild admin with high ranks?

Well, it's very consistent with how they randomly move threads about the forums. They don't take activity into account there either.

heinousmoz

Not a member of Roses (but do know a few of their members) but I honestly can't believe that the first reaction of ZOS is to transfer ownership of the guild to someone outside the Management Team.

I'm willing to bet all the gold in my bank (which isn't that much) that if said person had emptied the bank of everything ZOS would have shrugged their shoulders and gone "tough luck".

Time and again ZOS have shown their complete contempt of guilds - most wouldn't exist without addons for their management as there are no in game tools but this really does show their true colours.

ApoAlaia

Not a member either but I am an enjoyer of the activities The Roses organise which are always welcoming for everyone.

To add distress in this difficult time is unforgivable, CS should have shown a much greater degree of due care here.

I just cannot comprehend what reasoning led this CS representative to act the way they did.

Some employees and associates of ZOS are currently showing an unacceptable level of callousness, a marked lack of empathy and and a shocking disregard for both some of their fellow employees and their player base.

Actions like these tarnish the image of the company as a whole.

rpa

In Wildstar after GM had been inactive certain time any member of guild could initiate a vote for new GM. (As far as I understand it, I'm not familiar with exact details.) Sounds reasonable, doesn't it?
In practice anyone who found themself being only one from guild online when GM being absent for time could vote themself GM and raid bank &cet. When the gaem was ailing, that happened to several guilds including one I was in. (Not a big deal, cause core people had already gone back to WOW at that point. Just bit of a surprise for me coming back from a break from game and finding myself raised from member to officer and guild bank being empty.)
The point is, giving control of guild with absent GM to someone who asks for it is not that simple to do right.

heinousmoz

Except this isn't a case of of ZOS just not transferring the guild to the person who asked for it. This is ZOS transferring the guild to a random member they decided should have it, based on some nebulous metrics, instead of an officer.

This whole thing reminds me of those stories you read in the press of a bereaved person trying to get a company to talk to them and said company insisting on talking to the account holder (despite being told they're dead).

QueenMisi

Little update - after more tickets giving a specific list of admin rank people that it can be transferred to, they have transferred it to... a leader. So, not an admin or an officer, but it's further up the tree than donor 😁

At this point, it's going to be easy to get the guild from the leader. She's lovely and made a fabulous Twitch stream about the deceased GM and guild members in-home tributes

Customer service have been just... bizarre in their choices but hopefully we are near the finish line now

TaSheen

@QueenMisi - that's really good to hear! Here's to better days in future for all of you in the guilds.

bellablithely

I think this experience highlights one of the flaws in the way that Guilds are managed as part of the game. There needs to be a better system or clearer guidance as to what to expect.

I'd like to think ZOS will learn from this and make a few changes so it doesn't happen again to another guild, but I'm not feeling that optimistic today, so...

ApoAlaia

Glad to read that they did the right thing and put an end to this nonsense.

Hopefully lessons will be learned.

QueenMisi

ApoAlaia wrote: »

Glad to read that they did the right thingand put an end to this nonsense.

They kinda didn't, though. Luckily, the second name out of the sorting hat was someone who immediately gave the guild back, but there was no consideration on ZOS's part

Bottom line is, if you own a guild and you can't log in for 60 days, they will give it to any random person, even one that didn't ask for it or would be unlikely to get involved with running it

All is well with Roses now, though. We're on the guild finder and everything! (We put a ticket in when we got auto-delisted after 30 days, btw. They refused to relist it even though they knew were waiting out the 60 days because the GM had died)

kringled_1

Did all of the admins for the guild question lead other guilds, or was there someone at that rank who didn't have a guild ownership? Just wondering if that was one contribution to the odd decisions about who should get it. Glad it seems to be sorted mostly now.

IDespiseYouAll

In addition to the name they pulled from the hat being "not the worst possible choice" this time, the person that got GM the first time was suddenly made leader, so there's that...

KCMail

kringled_1 wrote: »

Did all of the admins for the guild question lead other guilds, or was there someone at that rank who didn't have a guild ownership? Just wondering if that was one contribution to the odd decisions about who should get it. Glad it seems to be sorted mostly now.

We had 1 "floating GM" should anyone need to step away from the game, he had no guild in his name and was Admin (Highest except the GM role and the rank of the other GMs of the 5 roses in the guilds they aren't the owner of)

QueenMisi

There was an admin who didn't hold a guild, because he was the one who would be taking over, and ten officers that don't hold guilds

acastanza_ESO

@ZOS_Kevin this is absolutely insane and needs management to take a serious look into the potential misconduct that the support agent is engaged in here.

Danikat

bellablithely wrote: »

I think this experience highlights one of the flaws in the way that Guilds are managed as part of the game. There needs to be a better system or clearer guidance as to what to expect.

I'd like to think ZOS will learn from this and make a few changes so it doesn't happen again to another guild, but I'm not feeling that optimistic today, so...

I think one solution would be an option to have two or three GMs. The person who creates the guild (or currently has that rank) can choose to promote other people as well and then they have full, equal control over the guild, at the same rank.

It would be up to them to decide if they all run the guild together or if one person is the 'active' GM and the others are backups, but the point is if something like this happens (or if the leader is sick or their house is caught in a tornado or whatever means they can't log in for a long time) someone else already has all the necessary permissions to take over and keep things running.

Of course they'd need to trust each other not to steal the guild, wipe the bank or otherwise abuse their power, but since the guild would start with only 1 leader if they don't trust someone with full control of their guild they can simply not promote them to that rank.

kringled_1

QueenMisi wrote: »

There was an admin who didn't hold a guild, because he was the one who would be taking over, and ten officers that don't hold guilds

Ty for the answer, I know it's an obvious question but people miss the obvious regularly.

QueenMisi

I've asked how a new GM is chosen by them, what the criteria is etc, so if I get any sort of coherent response I will post it here

heinousmoz

Danikat wrote: »

I think one solution would be an option to have two or three GMs. The person who creates the guild (or currently has that rank) can choose to promote other people as well and then they have full, equal control over the guild, at the same rank.

I spoke to a GM about that very same idea. If the actual listed GM (nothing to do with permissions) is offline long enough ZOS delist that guild from the Guild Finder which, if it is a trading guild, is essentially a death sentence for the guild.