Category talk:RA guilds

I can't understand why you would tag this for deletion. I say this category should stay. --JonTheMon 16:03, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

This is a valid guild category, and it is not empty. There is no reason to delete it. -- Wyn talk 16:20, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Why should we help syncers? Backsword 16:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

You're not following AGF. You have to assume that RA guilds are people who enjoy the lower levels of pvp. --JonTheMon 16:28, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

The only way they could as guilds are by syncing. I'm sure you know that. Backsword 16:32, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Just 'cause it's a group of RA players doesn't mean they have to play together. They might even enjoy the times they play against each other. --JonTheMon 16:35, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, that's one of the posibilities with syncing, but that still means they're syning. Backsword 16:38, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Why is it our place to judge whether that's right or wrong? By having this category, we aren't endorsing syncing, we're just documenting the guilds that may (though I doubt they are syncers; being an RA guild may just mean people in them like RA'ing, not that they RA together). -- Brains12 \ talk 16:40, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Yep, just because a guild is in this category doesn't mean that all they do is sync. In fact, looking at the guilds, all of them list other activities as well: TA, AB, HA, GvG, etc. Assuming that their primary activity is sync RA seems more than presumptuous. -- Hong 16:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Who said anything about "primary"? Are you just making stuff up? Backsword 16:44, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

You certainly seem to be. -- Hong 16:47, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Umn, you wrote it just two lines above. Pretty silly to pretend I made it up then. Backsword 17:23, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

You are right, we shouldn't. And helping someone doing something is generally considered edorsing it. I'm not suggesting that their guild pages are to be deleted. Backsword 16:44, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

If ArenaNet feels it's wrong, they will do something to change it. As Brains said, it's not our job to judge, just to document, and this is a legitimate guild activity, and as such, should have a category as do the other in game guild style activities. I would also agree that by simply having the category as an option for guilds to choose for their guild page is in no way an endorsement of syncing, it is simply documenting that Random Arenas is something that some guilds do. -- Wyn talk 16:50, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

ArenaNet can't do anything about it due to technical limitations. But since you and others think it is something the wiki should endorse, I won't fight it. Backsword 17:23, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Document =/= endorse. Get it straight. --JonTheMon 17:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC)