Could you add a "no kick" option in the clan

Could you add a "no kick" option in the clan , because let's say your friend is co-leader and he doesn't like one of your friends and he kick your friends out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BenSmith

Could you add a "no kick" option in the clan , because let's say your friend is co-leader and he doesn't like one of your friends and he kick your friends out

---

Um not its not SuperCells job to hold your hand, dont promote people that you cant trust to listen to what you say.

If your friend doesn't like your other clanmates, then demote him to elder until he understand that he can't like everyone.

Haha! :D
You're funny. :o

Sounds like a leadership problem....

Get your co-leaders in check or else demote them.

He should only be co if he can be an effective member of your management team. Leader that promote based on just friendship are not doing their job right.

Based on what you are saying the problem is I am thinking not even elder your friend needs to just be member, if that. And if you can't trust him not to mess up your clan against your wishes you have to ask if he is really the friend you think he is.

How about a ban option i like that more!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BenSmith

Could you add a "no kick" option in the clan , because let's say your friend is co-leader and he doesn't like one of your friends and he kick your friends out

---

Would like a cool down time for kicking, even by co-leaders. It is not that we make untrustworthy people co-leader, more that a naughty friend gets hold of the co-leader's device with the unsecured game account and plays a joke.

Would also like an archive of kicks that is not purged by kids chat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George1971

Would like a cool down time for kicking, even by co-leaders. It is not that we make untrustworthy people co-leader, more that a naughty friend gets hold of the co-leader's device with the unsecured game account and plays a joke.

Would also like an archive of kicks that is not purged by kids chat.

---

I have (and recommend) a clan rule that everyone is responsible for the security of their own device. We don't care what specific individual did something, only what account did it. This addresses a couple problems.

• Guys lie and say it was their little brother to get out of having to answer for bad behavior. So by saying it was the behavior of the account we kill the 'it wasn't me' defense.
• Maybe they are telling the truth but if that is something that happens with a given account then that account is a danger to have in the clan and/or to promote.

How that has played out is that ever since I instilled those rules last year and did some booting based on each of those concepts I stopped having those incidents and getting those excuses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwelshjr

I have (and recommend) a clan rule that everyone is responsible for the security of their own device. We don't care what specific individual did something, only what account did it. This addresses a couple problems.

• Guys lie and say it was their little brother to get out of having to answer for bad behavior. So by saying it was the behavior of the account we kill the 'it wasn't me' defense.
• Maybe they are telling the truth but if that is something that happens with a given account then that account is a danger to have in the clan and/or to promote.

How that has played out is that ever since I instilled those rules last year and did some booting based on each of those concepts I stopped having those incidents and getting those excuses.

---

Yeah, me too. It has happened a few times. They did not get co-leadership back.

Clans will learn this, quickly or slowly, painfully or not, but this is not a good argument for a little default protection.