Democracy at work

I'm happy to say the guild seems to be rolling along just fine.
Importantly, it looks like the idea of democracy seems to have settled in with most of the guild members. Discussions on policy pop up quite regularly, there's generally one or two votes per week and if sometimes, if we're lucky, people even come up with real solutions!

The calendar for June shows quite a lot of activity in the guild.

New rules include one that bans people from running for 'bureaucrat' more than 4 times in half a year after so many attempts by a single person, who was defeated in the polls every time. There's also an interesting new rank, 'dictator'. It's not as bad as the name suggests considering the player who has that rank only has power over lower level players, but it's still a pretty undemocratic idea.
The rank is a reaction to the guild's current inability to deal effectively with 'annoying' players, who beg for in-game gold or other kinds of help. The 'dictator' rank gives one player the power to remove such players from the guild.

The Dictator needs more power.

From conversations with guild members (for which I often use a character people do not recognize) it seems that there's an unwritten assumption that only when many people feel someone should be kicked the 'dictator' should exercise his power. There are however no formal rules on this and in actuality this means that the dictator can do as he pleases. 
When such formal rules (e.g. there has to be a vote before someone is removed from the guild) are suggested most people favour this over a dictator. There seems to be a lack of constructive (creative?) thinking when problems arise.
It occurs to me that creative or lateral thinking may be the one reason we're not just appointing kings to decide everything for us anymore.

New hypothesis: there aren't that many lateral thinkers in the guild.