“The answer is that one would like to be both the one and the other; but because it is difficult to combine them, it is far safer to be feared than loved if you cannot be both.” -Machiavelli, The Prince
There's a difference between "leading" and "ruling". In an LS, there is rarely an initial leader selection process, and there is rarely a process to nominate a replacement leader. Sack holders/officers may come and go but the leader rarely gets replaced by a new leader unless there is a very good reason for it.
Unlike actual law based governments, wherein the leadership is appointed and eventually rotated (either by death or by election), the head leadership of a linkshell/guild is very frequently permanent. People are far more likely to leave (whether individually or en masse) than oust the leader. And the main important thing to remember is that in a game, there are no mandatory requirements to even have such a group, nor to be governed by one, and that anyone is free to create their own group and governance at their leisure.
I don't have the luxury of deciding "I don't like Obama, so I'm starting my own new country". It doesn't work that way. Even if enough people do dislike their government enough to overthrow it, the leader must maintain order to prevent this to preserve his own safety and security. If a group of people decide they don't like their LS leader, the worst they can do to them typically is to just leave them without an LS to lead. They can't just decide to loot his mog house, take his stuff, and delete his character (Well, in most cases, they can't).
So leading what is ultimately still a social gathering of friends has far different criterion than leading a country with an economy, taxes, social policies, etc.
Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.