WannaBetJoin Date: 2011-01-01
Post Count: 23607 |
nope, there are dozens of clans that fulfill this expectation
even in war clans, i suspect that VAK, FEAR and RAT fulfill all or majority of the stated requirements
|
|
WannaBetJoin Date: 2011-01-01
Post Count: 23607 |
heh
|
|
WannaBetJoin Date: 2011-01-01
Post Count: 23607 |
edgy
|
|
|
warclans are trash now
the end is nigh
you are all tryhard losers!
|
|
|
Your measure of success / failure is flawed and I feel very narrowed.
Barring your last 2 points, what your Original post basically makes use of a Standardized view of clan success, one that is primitive and based on subjectivity.
A clan's success should be determined by stated or intended purpose. Goals. Objectives, missions.
If my clan is supposed to be small, avoid the front page, and organize itself in small meetings on a unfixed schedule, then it's successful. Because it's living up to my direction vision for it.
By your logic, any individual who isn't ranking in 100k a year is unsuccessful. |
|
WannaBetJoin Date: 2011-01-01
Post Count: 23607 |
No, there's no subjectivity to organizational performance when it comes to the bottom line. The bottom line for clans is to be sustainable in the long run and to facilitate activity continuously.
You don't have to make a certain amount of money or be on the front page to meet the expectations stated in the thread. I don't know where you're pulling the '100k' number from.
|
|
|
Yes, there is subjectivity here. The bottom line you're talking about is arbitrary and subjective as you see the "100k number" I pulled.
Clans are a group just like groups in the real world. I do not know a single group that has absolutely not a single reason or purpose, even if that purpose is absolutely unimportant or insignificant to any of us.
I think your statement that it must be sustainable and maintain activity shows exactly how narrow you're looking at groups, with no disrespect to you WB. Because what if my group is for example based on a rebellion effort against a larger or previous group?
Like in the case of RAT. I forget what group it was that was created to rebel, NFU maybe? Basically, you can't tell me that the object or bottom line of a group in the long term is to facilitate activity. The reason being is that not all groups are intended to maintain a long term existence at all.
Therefore, I argue that group success should be measured in their facilitation of a goal or purpose. How far does a group move to their intended direction or actualize their own vision?
I don't intend to undermine your points really, but instead I think that you could expand your view to include other options. If I was # budding clan leader and looked at what you had to say I might find myself disheartened. |
|
WannaBetJoin Date: 2011-01-01
Post Count: 23607 |
Yes, groups are organizations just like in the real world, and real world organizations have their bottom line regardless of the purpose they intend to serve. Rebel groups like 'NFU' aren't clans, they're political movements within a clan advocating for reform. If you want to go above and beyond by keeping track of progress in another area you consider important you have the option of doing that, but no matter which organization you are in, the bottom line remains to be financially sustainable and to have an active community. I welcome you to provide counter examples.
|
|
|
It's too convenient to write off groupslike NFU as not meeting our idea of a Group. Groups of people and organizations come together to facilitate a common purpose or maintain a mutual interest.
The only different between movements like NFU and typical clans is that their interest was fulfilled to the extent necessary. After that, there was no purpose or common interest to facilitate or continue.
But, you do say they are WITHIN a clan which I can't argue really. That is true.
So, for the sake of argument NFU is a bad example. However, take TGI for example. FOA and groups like that are technically groups within the group that acted as a continuation effort. TGI itself decided its interests were accomplished, they hedged their bets by shutting down the main group so as not to tarnish their identity.
That means that sustainability did not play into their goal or mission, not the main group anyway. Would you agree with me that TGI was successful?
Further, look at roleplaying groups. Sustainable activity? Sure. For a roleplay group to pursue roleplaying it does need to maintain activity. However, your post aims to shame clans for not having a lot of activity.
Roleplay groups are very niche. Say for example Dungeons and Dragons. DnD is a tabletop and not very popular on ROBLOX. Sustainable activity means these guys meet once or twice a month and that's saying a lot if they can accomplish that (because of the nature of DND that is).
Your point about financial sustainability has me a little weird man. Do you think then that a roleplay group with no money is unsuccessful? Because if I own a roleplaying clan like a "Dungeons and Dragons: Ed 5" and we're not spending or earning a single robux / dollar / etc, would you say it's unsuccessful? Even if said group is active? |
|
WannaBetJoin Date: 2011-01-01
Post Count: 23607 |
NFU is not # separate entity, this doesn't apply to them just like it wouldn't apply to # UCR political party within UCR. ### was not # successful clan in the long run. ### failed to meet the activity requirements stated in the thread and it therefore shut down. Roleplaying groups are generally far more active and far more profitable than war clans with regards to stated expectations. It's no surprise they are performing so much better. Functional clans don't have meet ups once # month. DnD isn't # clan, it's # community group that revolves around infrequent activities. Groups that have to spend more than they earn will not be successful because they are set to fall apart when the money runs out. If your cash flows are at the break even point, than you are financially sustainable. Once again, I've never stated # figure ## to how much # clan should earn, I've said that it should earn more than it spends. |
|
|
You're using distinctions to kind of skirt gloss over the point at heart here though. Functional clans do have meet ups once # month, because DnD / RP groups are clans and they are functional. You just slapped # different label on it, "community group". It's # group. Clans are # group. At the heart of any group is # stated or implied purpose / interest and their success is measurable on how well they facilitate their purpose/interest. We're not fundamentally disagreeing, which is cool, but I wish ##### not use the distinctions the way you do. |
|
|