I think its ridiculous that inactive clan founders keep the role of founder, as I have a clan where the original founder transferred the founder role to an already inactive person. This founder decided to fill a void in the clan with a void, disallowing for a unified clan effort, nor allowing an epicenter of the clan. Creating a clan that cannot have any admin additions, or any way to demote admins that may be inactive themselves. This problem causes many clans to grow unused and communities are lost to the people who have to stop playing, or do not have the capacity for such a responsibility, and to take up names and clan tags that others could use. Another problem that it may contribute is the taking up digital space on the servers used for clans and the such, with empty or inactive clans; though probably not a main concern as the data it would takes is minimal compared to game play data. I feel that clan ownership should be removed from those that are inactive (inactivity that is a certain length, obviously because 3 days up to a month might be an inconveniently short allowance, the minimum allowance I feel should be around 6 months to a year, considering the casual clans). In this idea that inactive clan founder-ship (within a certain amount of allowance) should be passed from inactive founders to a more active member (within the clan hierarchy to admins, then members and so on), I'd like to see opinions for who would be for and against this idea, to see pros and cons, and show Bungie how the community feels about this idea.