Won't lie, I partially agree with what Bach brought up. While this will make accepting Members a much faster process, it seems like the main factor here is being overlooked; this being that once someone gains Membership, they represent XenoGamers even more-so than an xG-Rep. My point being that it's crucial to have community input on someone before they gain Membership. The easier it is to get in, the easier it is for that person to potentially damage xG from the inside (through either wrong representation or to extremes such as gaining a Staff rank and abusing). 10 vouches wasn't impossible, you just had to actually try to get them. Whether that be actively playing on the Servers and making a name for yourself, or by getting involved in the community through forums or TeamSpeak (which is a whole 'nother matter as most people are confined within community channels). Now I know you could argue that by saying "Oh, but Forest, if they're so bad they'll just get -1 vouches anyways" but do keep in mind that it is incredibly easy to mask almost anything online, especially personality or behaviour. Just food for thought.
I'm also curious as to how Membership will work now that we no longer have Division specific qualifications. It was mentioned that the guidelines/rules are currently being worked on so if the following comments/questions will be addressed later then ignore the following:
If Membership qualifications are for a global Membership, will activity still work in the same way (IE. active in say, TF2)? And if this does go through, should the Division Manager(s) or Leader(s) really have a say in these new applicants? Seems to me that if it does go through, it would now fall under the jurisdiction of the Community Leaders. After all, Division Managers/Leaders are supposed to deal directly with content/issues/players that directly influence their Division. Seeing as how new applicants would not influence this any longer, Member Submissions would only be dealt with by Community Leaders (with community input of course). I get that 'segregation' is the biggest concern here, but I'm not so sure that altering the Member Submission guidelines will really influence things in the intended way, if anything it just creates more work, which brings me to my next concern.
Monitoring forum activity and TeamSpeak activity sounds simple enough and looks good on paper, but keep in mind that Member Submissions are cumulative; that is, we don't just get one submission after the next so much as we get multiple in one day. That being said, monitoring all of these applicants may put a huge strain on the Higher-Ups, I mean I personally would not be able to keep up. Especially given that, as previously mentioned, these applicants would be monitored by the Community Leaders which are few in number as is.
I may just be looking too deep into this, but it's still somewhat of a concern because chances are that if things do become too much to handle, these newly enacted rules will just slip back to the former lax ways of handling Member Submissions.