Time to Get Rid of Inactive Leaders

[Waldoh]

I like the idea but explain in detail like if leader is inactive who can become leader, how leader will be chosen will it be on the basis of xp level and th level and donation or on the basis of votes of clan members

There are some good suggestions earlier in the thread.

In a nutshell: next in rank. More than 1 with same rank? Then TH level + donations. OR (... my favorite) an Election lasting from 48 to 72 hours where everyone in the clan from the start of the election can vote for who they want as leader. (BUT the only candidates are the ones of the next highest rank: usually the co-leaders.) After election time is up, even if all didn't vote, the candidate with the most votes wins.

The election idea can open doors for campaigning, it will fire up the chat room and could possibly end up being a bit of fun & give a little spark to liven up the clan.

[Mukundgpt30]

I like the idea very much but what about the clans having 1 members only for a huge time.Will he be kicked directly and clan will be closed after 30 days of inactivity.

[Waldoh]

Another reason there needs to be a timer set on inactive leaders is because "stuff happens"! People do quit on line games without "logging off". Worst case, people die. For whatever reason, there are times there will be inactive/dead bases and some of them will be in leader position. With millions of players, this is inevitable. It's not: "Will Supercell deal with this issue?" It's "When?"

[Waldoh]

I like the idea very much but what about the clans having 1 members only for a huge time.Will he be kicked directly and clan will be closed after 30 days of inactivity.

If the guy simply wants his own 1member clan, no problem. He just has to log on once every 30 days to be active. Simple.

[Mukundgpt30]

I like your idea I also would like to see the same to happening

[Waldoh]

The thing is to continue letting Supercell know we want this matter resolved. The coding required is not unreasonable and will probably work for the benefit of both the players and Supercell. As well, Supercell could use some positive "P. R.", which will help alleviate the onslaught of hate they've received over the past number of months. A positive response from Supercell, as opposed to an attempt to shirk the issue, will undoubtedly gain positive reviews for the company. Working in marketing strategy, this could be a winning situation for Supercell "if" they play their cards right.

[Mukundgpt30]

Work on this idea SC please

[pacomius]

Repus, STOP TAKING THINGS OUT OF CONTEXT!!! You quoted me as saying: "(My mistake was letting someone else make the drone account to be placed as temporary leader instead ovf doing it myself. If I did I probably wouldn't have ever known there was the issue of inactive leaders.)

If you're still not getting it, ask someone to explain it to you.

Again, before you respond to anything, READ FIRST! It's not a sign of wisdom to judge a matter before knowing the facts and worse when your attitude simply sux.

(Anyone else finding this annoying?)

No, i do not find it annoying but interesting. At least you admit you made a mistake. So accept your mistake and stop asking supercell and all coc players to pay for it. MAKE A NEW CLAN, OR JOIN ANOTHER, OR DELETE THE GAME. the options are many, apart from opening a hole for hijacking another person's clan. Do we ever reason it that coc has millions of players worldwide with different intentions and dispositions?

[Waldoh]

... "opening a hole for hijacking another person's clan. Do we ever reason it that coc has millions of players worldwide with different intentions and dispositions?"

When I wanted to take a week or two off the game, I gave leader to one of my co's who'd return it sometime after I got back. (Never a rush & I didn't even have to ask for it.) That's a common practice with many clans. Inactivity is different. The leader is not temporarily giving his/her position to someone to oversee the clan. A simple "I'll be back!" would be nice, but these clans are not even left with that. (Incidentally, most people who leave the game may uninstall it from their phone, but not remove their account from their present clan. Leaders, too.)

If there were a time limit for leader inactivity, say 30 days or even 45, then I do not see hijacking as an issue. And should a leader lose his position because of prolonged inactivity, how is that unfair? Was his inactivity fair for the rest of the clan? They also have been working to build the clan. In essence, it is not just the leader's clan. To the degree of their participation, it belongs to the clan members as well.

There are many reasons a leader may become inactive. If one of them is because the leader quit the game, it is not fair that the rest of the clan has to pay for it and lose all their effort in helping build the clan.

Trying to be fair to the leader is fine, but we must also consider being fair to the rest of the clan. Them wishing to continue does not make them criminals or "clan stealers". Fairness needs to apply to them, as well.

[Mukundgpt30]

If there would be no war and donations in a clan for 1-2 months then the clan should be closed. All it's members, elders, co leaders and leader will be kicked out.This will help in destroying clans who are useless and taking space in database for no good reason.