I was thinking about this some last night, and I'm not sure that the proposed punishment concepts will produce the desired results. Follow me on this: If a clan is midway through a tournament and loses a group of players and find themselves unable to continue (in Genoke's example if they lose 4 players, they wouldn't be able to compete in CL5 according to the tournament rules), a punishment would fall on the remnants of the clan that presumably would prefer to continue with the event rather than on the guilty parties that left them hanging. What if that group of players was recruited to join a different clan? That second clan would be the guilty party in destroying the first clan's ability to participate. Punishing the first clan means they're suffering not just the loss of members but also punitive penalties on top of it. Punitive penalties of this sort make the clan a less desirable home for potential recruits which makes it even harder for them to recover.
I also understand the flip side of all this is that a clan is responsible for its players and its commitments. But clan members have varying levels of familiarity and commitment to each other, and smaller clans that are concerned about the consequences of losing members would have to be much more careful in screening members for their level of commitment before allowing new recruits to join.
Another aspect of all of this is that the clan tournaments are annual events. Yet, how stable is a clan's membership over the course of a year? I know there are well-established clans that have members that have there for years. There are also quite a few players that have switched clans every year or two. Josko brought up ACC1 and said that TOFU had dropped out of it partway through. I don't know anything about it - I wasn't involved in clans when that happened two years ago - and as far as I can tell, a good 2/3-3/4 of the current TOFU membership weren't part of that decision. Or take PACK. They dropped out of CC4 because they don't have enough active members. Assuming they remain as a clan and actively recruit, they could be 3-4 times their current size by next year when CC5 starts. Should all those new recruits be prevented from playing in the new war? Punitive penalties should fall on the guilty, not the innocent, and I can't figure out a good way to assign guilt. If a clan is forced to drop because several of their members left to join a different clan, that new clan could be penalized, but if members leave for multiple clans, which departure(s) are actually to blame for causing the clan to drop out, and who should be penalized?
I think the only approach that makes any sense is to say that if you drop out of a clan event you've signed up for (and the event has already started), your clan should have to complete a war before signing up for the next version of that event (or maybe before signing up for any new events). That falls in line with the requirement on new clans to complete a clan war before joining some of the premier events.
At the same time, I think we're blowing out of proportion how much impact these sorts of things have. PACK leaving CC4 resulted in a bye in the first round. How many clans did it impact? It meant one of the clans in the play-in round would have gone straight through if PACK has simply never signed up, or when compared to PACK staying in, the only difference was a bye for one clan. Compared to the alternatives, you either have 1 clan slightly positively impacted, or you have 1 clan marginally negatively affected. AOC and Empire leaving mid-way through CL5 qual round was a bit more disruptive since the qualification groups were a bit smaller, but they probably would have been that size to begin with if AOC and Empire hadn't joined. I'm sure it was a record-keeping hassle for qwert, but it wasn't a major impact. TOFU withdrawing from CL5-PL results in a bye for each of the other PL clans (a slight positive for the other clans) compared to if TOFU stayed in.
In any case, Conquer Club is about having fun. If you start penalizing people for things other people did a year ago, it just makes it a lot less fun. Supposedly CClub is declining. I don't know about that, but I know if you start obligating people to do things their real-life commitments won't let them, or if you start punishing them for placing a higher priority on the things in life that actually matter, you're not going to ultimately see a positive outcome.