Quote (betoggc @ 18 Jun 2016 09:11)
I voted no.
My opinion is that some guilds are made exactly on a base of hierarchy, so some people like to get promoted with their work on their guilds and then they be happy because they have their jobs recognized. Also they gain more responsibility on their guilds because of their promotions...
Also, you can already use a guild on a non-hierarchy base... My guild is an example of this kind of guild. I decided to put the real name of our members as their ranks and no one is "more important" than the other.
So these were my thoughts. Good luck anyways. ^_^
Some guilds are hierarchical which is why I suggested this to be an opt-in feature, not a blanket change of the guild system. Our guild is non-hierarchical but however we express that, our members are still displayed in a descending, ranked list. I would argue that placement in the list does have implied importance because most guilds operate in a way that gives it importance.
It sounds like you've made an executive decision regarding your guild's ranks and you're top dog despite the gestures of equality and hospitality. I also feel you haven't made an argument to be countered because as I said this would be an opt-in aesthetic and symbolic feature that you could choose to not use. Your vote against might have something to do with it competing with other suggestions in terms of time management from the website admins. That time management information isn't publicly known though, and there is no formal minimum/maximum features added to the website in any given timeframe, so I feel the "suggestion market" argument doesn't hold water.