There was no consensus. There were people on both sides of the argument. I want a useful section for guild leaders and commanders. I hold no authority over the server, nor do I want any. You are not understanding this - you keep thinking that we're trying to set up some power structure to control you and the rest of the WvW community. Many of use want a quick means of communication that stretches beyond teamspeak and PMs because those are not practical for the purposes of coordinating our own guilds, and you and others keep saying that the TC community wants to bar us from being allowed to coordinate our own activities without you being able to scrutinize our every conversation.
First class example in how to be a dick. How about just asking you to show that you actually want something from the war council section. If you're too lazy to write a brief description of why you want to be there, then you're probably not going to add any sort of thoughtful contribution. I thought the whole argument against the war council was that it was useless and no one ever discussed anything (according to many of you), so why put people/guilds on it that don't want to try and be useful by contributing or can't put in the effort to say "I/We want to be on the war council because ..." The same people that make that accusation that it was useless in the past and unnecessary are the same people trying to condemn any future iterations to also be useless. If you don't like it, don't participate.
In theory, posting this information to the forum for the public to judge is a good thing. In practice, I cannot point to many people I would trust to operate this system. Many debates/arguments can get heated while still being productive, and in text where tone does not translate they can especially give a toxic impression to others, and people inevitably come along and start the carebear "can't we all just get along" party with a bunch of gifs/pictures to diffuse a conversation that didn't need their input in the first place because the parties weren't fighting. Now, with this, we're going to have to trust someone to judge this, then name people to the public group... there can be no misunderstandings here - none. If someone posts a conflict report for a misunderstanding or miscommunication, you have damaged someone's reputation with the server and there is no taking it back - coming out and saying "Sorry, I didn't know it was meant this way" will not undo what has been done. If you want to name and shame people for being toxic, I'm fine with that, but whoever is in charge of this, be it a single person, small group, or full division, better damn well completely understand every single side of the story. You will alienate and ostracize people with these and can cause some real damage - I already think that the way this community handles conflict is unhealthy, and this has the potential to make it worse.
These seems like a good list of rules/guidelines to follow
I expect that this is for guilds that become inactive? If so, then why do I have reapply to this division every 3 months? Should this activity not continually renew my membership? Also, I'm not too concerned about this myself since we don't miss many raids, but putting extra pressure on guilds to have raids when they don't necessarily want to raid is going to cause tension between the guilds and undue stress on the guild in question. I don't think that automatic removal is the answer. If guilds start missing raids, this should prompt the delegate to go investigate and contact the guild as part of their duties. Perhaps their schedule has changed, or maybe there are just circumstances that warrant a small break. Take SE for example (since they are on a break), they raid every day - with this system, they would be removed in under a week, even though they are just taking a short break. My guild TI, for example, raids 4 nights/week, giving us twice as much time before we would be removed if we took a break. In either case a reasonable person wouldn't think that the guild should be removed for that. Militia commanders and volunteers to hold trainings - good - these people MUST be active in leading or organizing TC WvW effort though to warrant their membership. Every single WvW player, no. We have a section for this, it is not the war council or whatever it's called. Really? Here's the thing with this one... I'll recruit whoever I see fit. If they cause issues, it's my job to deal with it internally or remove them from my guild. I don't have anyone that has been banned, and I'm certainly not posting a recruiting message "Attention previously banned members: join my guild", but as a guild leader, it's my problem to deal with. If the server wants to stick it's hands into my guild roster and says something to the extent of choose between that guild member or your WvW council membership, I'll completely drop all membership and affiliation with the organizational structure of TC and run wherever and whenever I want. Don't get me wrong, I want this to work, but my guild mates come before the server every time.
Commanders, I fully support, whether they are guild group commanders or militia commanders, but they MUST be active. Sentries and scouts, I value their opinions most of the time, but if we don't have a section that is for guild leaders and commanders, it is not what I'm looking for. I'm open to trying it, and I could be wrong, but I don't like the idea of it. As far as WvW players that play 2 nights/week, this does not fit your description above, unless you mean those active in organizing things like trainings (and so far, that has been exclusively done by commanders anyway). We have a section for general WvW communication among all verified TC members, but we don't need to turn this into the same thing. Besides, what is the point of limiting guild reps if every single one of their members qualifies (since the requirement for guilds is 2+ nights/week already)?
I appreciate the effort you put into all of this, Jadon. I think that all of us are going to need a fair bit of time to be able to take all of this in and ask questions, make comments/suggestions, and bring forth any concerns we may have. I skimmed over it, and I do think that (like you said in one of your previous posts) we need more structure, and a clearly defined structure for those of us that do want to be actively involved and contributing. I'm sure that you will get plenty of feedback on this, and some changes may or may not be made before the community adopts it - and I've even seen a few things I'll have questions about before I'm fully on board with such a comprehensive system (but I don't have the time while I'm at work to ask them).
I like the idea of recognition, but we have so many people that put in so much for the server, I could see this causing drama or creating apathy amongst those that do not get recognized. Keep in mind, we do have the Props thread, and recognizing the people that really stand out as well as what they did to deserve the shout out would achieve a similar goal
If it were me, I wouldn't.... you would have to find a place to store them and probably feed them, and I imagine it would take a lot of effort to convince someone else to give you money for them to pay for the server stuff. Children just are not a very practical form of currency.
It looks like the calendar page can support multiple calendars, so it's just a thought, but could we get a calendar specifically for WvW raid schedules for guilds that would be willing to post when they'll be on? I think something like this would have gone a long way toward helping us find coverage gaps when we were in T1, but now it could still help us keep coverage up and allow militia to see when guilds are scheduling to run open raids if there are any particular guilds/commanders they like to run with.