Why do GOP Community Clans live so briefly?

Ever since people saw beauty in the game of GOP, there were clans trying to unite people of this mind. There was Pinata, Sado, Vorltex, Hoppeeee, Hari Kari and other people, always starting up a GOP Clan, overtaking the previous one by force, and then collapsing when a newer one overtook it by force.

The most recent situation of this, was Pixie Cow establishing "Gop Revival" fc, trying to overtake the current popular GOP fc, Gee Oh Pee (led by Hoppeeee and Gusty52), but it failed after a couple of days with fair success, and Gee Oh Pee lasts as a remarkably long-standing fc.

The case for why this is bad speaks for itself, so I'll leave it at that. We should rather look into why this is, and try to fix the problem.

I believe part of the why, is the internal struggle and rivalry within the GOP Community. People want to rule and people do not agree.

If we look at 5050 clans, I dare say Gop Addict has maintained itself to quite a success, and haven't seen such problems of anyone overtaking it. At least not in many years. It's a travesty that these rats would do a better job of it than us! They have plenty of drama and lots of internal struggle, but, mayhaps, it is their democratic way of handling leadership within the clan that has maintained them. Unlike Gop clans, they don't have dictators claiming the throne of that name forevermore, but rather leadership rotation, allowing for its name to survive, even when they face internal struggle. We should learn!

If we could have democratic leadership rotation within the popular GOP fc, even Sado and Hoppeeee could live within the same name, without having to rally support for wars. Maybe this would encourage less bloodshed, and less confusion. Many people have already "given up" on GOP clans because they're tired of their friends fighting over support and tearing the community off from eachother in awkwardness.

Naturally, to instituate such civilised democracy within the Gop Community, people needs voice themselves about its implementation first. What do you think?

Timo wrote:

If we look at 5050 clans, I dare say Gop Addict has maintained itself to quite a success, and haven't seen such problems of anyone overtaking it. At least not in many years. It's a travesty that these rats would do a better job of it than us!

We're civil.. Most of the time.

I think the problem lies not only with the Leader's but everyone who ever joined them. The main difference, and most obvious, is that 50/50 is not competitive. The competitive aspect between even those who are ranked together in the same chat makes them do all this weird drama etc. People just don't co-operate aswell when they strive to do better than others. Also, 50/50 Ranks confront problems between each other, whereas "Pro Goppers" seem to just whine about others behind each others backs.

Main point; We get along with each other. That's why we have survived. ;o

P.S, No offence meant to anyone. :x

Well, my personal view is that an organized system of democratic leadership could be formed, but would end up being useless.

For the most part, changes in power result in fights and arguments. It takes some time for people to settle down, and ease back into the flow of things after a change in power. And other times, the normal flow of things never returns, as some leaders change things around so much. Frequent changes to the GOP community cause much disruption to the players.

Remember, the Great Orb Project is a mini-game in Runescape that is meant to be played and enjoyed. Is it really necessary that we have some intricate government in the game, which will only ensure an unsettled community?

We already have a small-scale form of democratic leadership in place anyway: If a friend chat remains for a long time, it either means that people have been beaten into submission, or that they are generally content with the friend chat. It is difficult to beat people into submission over a video game, if not impossible. Allow a long standing friend chat to remain with the same leaders, and as long as people are content, they will not attempt to overthrow the leaders.

If someone is discontent, they generally try to change the friend chat to the way they would have it. If this can not be done, they attempt to create a friend chat of their own, or support someone else in this effort. And people vote with their feet. If they go to another friend chat, then they are - in a way - voting for that friend chat's success.

As for the success of Gop Addict, Ranyaw stated: "The main difference, and most obvious, is that 50/50 is not competitive. The competitive aspect between even those who are ranked together in the same chat makes them do all this weird drama etc. People just don't co-operate aswell when they strive to do better than others."

As long as we maintain a system of healthy competition, and not one of bragging rights, I believe that we can cooperate just as well as Gop Addict without an overly-organized ranking system. It may be important to note that GA's ranking system has led to many incidents of drama, despite the fact that they are always able to deal with it. In short, there will always be drama, with or without an intricate ranking system, and we will always have to overcome the drama.

The difference is more drama vs less drama. More change is bound to bring about more drama.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, you must all be thinking, "Hope just wants all the power! He wants to be the leader forever!"

Believe me, I have little power over what people do at GOP. I can't force them to stop sabbing or to be nice to people. I can kick them from the friend chat when they are rude, and ask them to be nice. Outside of the friend chat, they do what they want, and I have no say in what they can or cannot do. I have little power to begin with.

Honestly, I see my role as a leader to just be there for people, to maintain a decent community, and to promote positive changes to the GOP community. I run a friend chat with Gusty. Other than that, I am simply another gopper that genuinely cares for the GOP community.

There isn't anything frighteningly special about leading, and by promoting frequent changes to who is leading, we make it seem that leading is something to be had. Leading should be something that people do out of their love and care for a community or group of people. It should not be something that they do to boost their ego.

Hoppeeee wants all the power, obviously!

Just kidding :P

Well phrased, man! :) Everything is being run greatly :) Props!
Keep up the good work!

Tired now, good night :p

I don't know if it was your intention, but the phrasing of your post made it sound like you were making assumptions about people's actions, and the reasons behind them (namely, current and past chat 'leaders' becoming so for the purpose of power, and 'ruling'). I think that assumption is quite unfair (:

Also, I don't think it's nice to call people in Gop Addict "rats".

Quote :

Honestly, I see my role as a leader to just be there for people, to maintain a decent community, and to promote positive changes to the GOP community... I am simply another gopper that genuinely cares for the GOP community.

Me likey.

By the way, I am just going to try and use the quote button on here to see how it works. I keep seeing people using them, and now I want to as well! :P

Quote :

Testing, testing, 1 2 3....

I DID IT!!!! :O