Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

Scott. I see nothing wrong with letting all members know who is being moved to inactive after a muster or as it happens.

It might actually encourage their friends to reach out to them and bring 'em back. That happens, I know I and others have done similar just for random reasons.

Salute!

Quote: Those are specific examples (mention in prior post of removed officers from LGA muster rolls, and their lack of registered games and log in record to the forums).

Yes, specific examples are less prone to accusations of exaggeration and misrepresentation.

... the policies enacted by LGA HQ has helped to clear the muster rolls for some of the 21 new recruits (a club wide phenomena that surely speaks to the vibrant culture we have here!).

Regards,

We did make several attempts to contact the now inactive members

The club exists for its members, so we should be flexible in meeting a range of different needs, welcoming to a range of different members, from the vocal ones with many games in play to the casual gamer, content to join in when time permits.

And if a muster is missed or just don't have time for games during a few months period of time, there should not be the burden of having to re-enlist to start playing again, or to stop by the Rhine tavern and find their account has been shut off.

I am glad to hear that you tried to contact those that were made inactive, John. We should make the effort, but at the same time we should expect some level of turnover as people lose interest or drift away, like the officers cited by Todd in his example.

However, if we need room in the ranks for new officers, well, the CiC controls the order of battle. And if there is interest in a formation comprised of the most active officers, or formalize ad hoc formations, much like le Tondu did in several campaigns, you can do that to.

_________________
Marechal Jeff Bardon
Duc de Castiglione et Prince de Wagram
Commandant de la Garde Imperiale

I fully agree with others that we should be more flexible than 4 enforced musters per year (as the new rules proposes). I also wonder why the French army is removing officers that seems to be in-active since 2010?!
Since the beginning of the AAA we did annual musters. So, every year in around this time of the year we removed in average 7 officers from the OOB to the arty reserve. These were indeed officers not playing games, not active in the forum and not in contact with any of the higher commanders in the army.

We used a simple system of 1 email + 2 reminders + 1 forum post (missing officers)+ 1 private email to their reserve email address (which we collect at their application). And it always worked.

Out of these 7 two or three always respond later, in 3-4 months, to become re-activated again. That's because indeed we keep them in the mailing list.

Besides that every 2 years or so I send an email to the complete list of arty officers (the reserves) to ask them to re-enlist. 1 or 2 will do each time.

And just to respond to an earlier post: it is NOT a one click operation to activate or de-active an officer! In the DOR perhaps yes.
In the army administration and website it is around 15 minutes work per officer to change the websites, the off-line army administration file, send an official email to the officers, and his commanders, that he is de-activated etc. And that is indeed such a waste of time when an officer pops up again after a few months. So, when we do 4 muster per year the army commanders will be busy continuously to chase officers, activate them again and de-activate others. So far about one-click- operations!!
I prefer to use my time in a more efficient way.

What on earth is the problem if a not-active officer stays on the OOB for max one year? If the OOB becomes to small we make it bigger...

New club rules or not, but I will not do 4 muster per year and I will also advise the other army commanders in the Coalition not to do so.

Gentlemen & Those of the French persuasion <Salute>

I suspect that a majority of the members of this club are here to find like minded people to do battle with. Some like myself enjoy the banter on the forums as well. We are grateful to those that give of their time to organise the club.

There are probably some who have met people who they continue to play against but don't bother to register the games because they have become two friends who play games.

It matters not whether the cabinet are appointed or elected. The are experienced players who have given their time to the club. They have discussed these changes. They have come to a decision based on their experience.

Lets vote yes - see how it goes - tweek any problems as they appear.

Lets get back to exchanging insults with our foes.

_________________

_________________
Marechal Jeff Bardon
Duc de Castiglione et Prince de Wagram
Commandant de la Garde Imperiale

As far as this muster thing...

Maybe I am crazy, but I cannot wrap my head around people arguing against it. You guys are suggesting the club should bend over backwards for members who are not currently playing any games and cannot be bothered to answer a simple email or forum post. So if they are moved to an inactive status, with the ability to become active again at any time, what exactly is the club losing? I'm sure this is a small minority of the club anyhow.

Now, I would not mind seeing some exceptions made for legitimate reasons. For example, if I secure a contract tomorrow that is going to result in my needing to work out of town for the next 4 months, I would hope the club would make an exception for me not being able to remain 'active' at that time. However, even if I was moved to an inactive status, big freaking deal. I just ask to be made active again when I return.

It sounds like you are suggesting a lot of time and energy be expended tracking these people down.

I do not care what type of club or organization you are talking about. If you need to literally beg people to be an active participant, something is really wrong with your organization.

A couple emails or waiting until after a second missed muster is hardly what I would call bending over backwards.

_________________
Marechal Jeff Bardon
Duc de Castiglione et Prince de Wagram
Commandant de la Garde Imperiale

Salute!

As for trying to make or maintain contact with officers, as both a Chef d'Etat-Major and Corps commander I have sent multiple emails out to the officers in my units, not just at muster time, but for other reasons as well.

The vast majority of my emails never get a response from more than a fraction of the recipients.
During musters, a total of 4 - 5 emails were sent in total over a 2 week period to those who failed to muster or finally did so in the last day(s).

As with so much in life the core of the issue being discussed here is communication.
Members of a club which they voluntarily joined have a responsibility (as I see it) to maintain contact with the club.

If a member has real life issues that require him taking a break from gaming -
or otherwise be absent from general club interaction, it simply takes an email explaining in the smallest amount of detail to someone in the club that you need a leave of absence.

If you are up front saying going to be gone for a year - well maybe you will lose Regt assignment, but you could surely maintain your rank; if you are up front about being gone for several months, say through one muster - I'm sure it is no big deal - because you communicated!

In no way what so ever do I see it as the responsibility of the club to chase or track down erstwhile members - the burden of membership is on the members.
Nothing more and nothing less.

Regards,