Change Co-Leader Rank

In clans, you have four ranks: member, elder, co-leader, and leader. However, co-leader implies that one has mutual ownership and rights to the clan with someone else. Therefore, any higher ranking (leader) should not exist in such a situation. Think of it like this: in movies, you can have co-directors. You say so and so co-directed the film with so and so no. 2. You don't say so and so co-directed it, while so and so no. 2 directed it. I propose you should either change the name of the co-leader rank to something else, like nobility, or change the leader rank to supreme overlord/founder. As many kids use this game the misuse of the co prefix in the game could lead to confusion later in life.

Bad idea, no offence

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGambatron

Bad idea, no offence

---

Fixing grammar is a bad idea? Our next generation english should be interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XenoK

In clans, you have four ranks: member, elder, co-leader, and leader. However, co-leader implies that one has mutual ownership and rights to the clan with someone else. Therefore, any higher ranking (leader) should not exist in such a situation. Think of it like this: in movies, you can have co-directors. You say so and so co-directed the film with so and so no. 2. You don't say so and so co-directed it, while so and so no. 2 directed it. I propose you should either change the name of the co-leader rank to something else, like nobility, or change the leader rank to supreme overlord/founder. As many kids use this game the misuse of the co prefix in the game could lead to confusion later in life.

---

That's pretty logical.

But Co-Leader suggests that you are the right-hand man; so you are co-operating with the leader, but do not have the same privileges.

A co-writer is different from a writer. It suggests that the 'writer' wrote it mainly, with a little bit of help from another person.

However, if I say there are 2 writers who wrote this book, then it suggests that they had the equal amount of effort gone into making it.

Do you see?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kyumin2lee

That's pretty logical.

But Co-Leader suggests that you are the right-hand man; so you are co-operating with the leader, but do not have the same privileges.

A co-writer is different from a writer. It suggests that the 'writer' wrote it mainly, with a little bit of help from another person.

However, if I say there are 2 writers who wrote this book, then it suggests that they had the equal amount of effort gone into making it.

Do you see?

---

with respect, while these have been seen as implications of the use, it's still incorrect. You can say that the co-leader has different priveleges than another co-leader but you cannot have a co-leader and a leader in the same instance, get my jive? You make a good point, that someone else can have main control but that doesnt change the fact that in a correct hierchy of roles, when a co-something is present, a non-co-something of the same type cannot exist. You can call each of the co-leaders leaders, because they all lead whatever they are leading. But you cannot call one co-leader the leader, and not the rest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XenoK

with respect, while these have been seen as implications of the use, it's still incorrect. You can say that the co-leader has different priveleges than another co-leader but you cannot have a co-leader and a leader in the same instance, get my jive? You make a good point, that someone else can have main control but that doesnt change the fact that in a correct hierchy of roles, when a co-something is present, a non-co-something of the same type cannot exist. You can call each of the co-leaders leaders, because they all lead whatever they are leading.

---

Very correct.

I do see where you're coming from. But I think you're over-reacting to this concern, because the terminology is how it is.
It happens all the time in language.
Also; Yes, co-leader is an incorrect term. But think about it; when has there ever been a complete democracy of leaders? There is always a leader of the leaders (e.g. Arthur and the Round Table)
Co-leaders are leaders in them selves. They are helped and guided by the Leader., suggested by the prefix co-.



However, I see you're point. Nobility or a "Councillor" will replace "co-leader" nicely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGambatron

Bad idea, no offence

---

Your four word answer is not helpful. Could you provide me your reasoning as to why you seem to think this is a bad idea? I dont take offence as I do not play sports. I don't take offense either because your reasoning eludes me.

Depending on your dialect the two different spellings will mean different things. For me offense is both sports and feeling from hurtful language. Offence will sometimes mean sports according to some in my area. If you're british or canadian I'll understand but if you're American shame on you. (Not really but you get my point).

honestly, it should go member, (some clever name who can only recruit members but not kick them), elder (with the ability to kick member and recruiter) leader of elders( all abelitys but able to send clan mail), co- leader and then leader.

added poll

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JayJoker

honestly, it should go member, (some clever name who can only recruit members but not kick them), elder (with the ability to kick member and recruiter) leader of elders( all abelitys but able to send clan mail), co- leader and then leader.

---

or maby go member, elder, cansolar (Im polish and i cant spell) co-leader and then leader. royalty should be automatically given to highest donateor, next to ther rank, if they have elder or co.