Comments | damned_lounge: IMPORTANT POLL: Activity Check Alterations

burningvigor in damned_lounge

IMPORTANT POLL: Activity Check Alterations

Nov 07, 2011 19:50

Hello, everyone! The time has finally come to discuss a possible change in the Activity Check requirements. I realize this is long overdue, but we were all busy with handling the end of the military arc, so that's why there's been a delay. I hope that wasn't too inconvenient for anyone ( Read more... )

*poll, !mod

Leave a comment

Back to all threads

rocksthecourt November 8 2011, 05:37:12 UTC

Just to put my two cents out there, I'm personally really divided on this issue. Mainly because I fully understand both sides. The idea of changing the system makes me admittedly nervous and uncomfortable, but at the same time, I wonder if that's just resistance to change and it won't really be so bad.

My opinion is that Activity Check should really just be a call out of "Hi, yes, I'm here. Don't drop me from the game." I understand how people getting by with one post every two weeks (and only that) could be really annoying and keeps in characters that basically post once in a blue moon... which can be detrimental and discouraging if it's a canonmate or someone else otherwise important. But at the same time, I feel like it counteracts the aforementioned purpose of an AC if... say someone posted 4 times. Or hell, 6 times within the last week. They would fail the AC, not because they aren't active, but because they aren't active enough. And I think it's that implication that is making people more nervous than anything else ( ... )

purpletaint November 8 2011, 05:45:00 UTC

Whoa, I'm going to comment on one thing at least. This isn't talking about posting every day at all. This is just saying posting between 8 and 12 times in total within the entirety of the DS/NS cycle.

rocksthecourt November 8 2011, 05:48:50 UTC

oh... OH. Okay, cross that whole part off then. If that's the case, then that's nothing at all. But I got the impression of otherwise because the poll is asking "If it is changed, within how many days will a character need to have been posted?" As in within how many days before the AC, right? That made me think it was asking for 8/10/12 posts within a 7/10/14 day span. What's that poll asking for then?

purpletaint November 8 2011, 05:52:43 UTC

Yeah, it really is nothing. It's asking for:

A) One post within the last time frame (7-14 days).

B) Proof of (8-12) posts in the entirety of the DS/NS cycle.

It's really not as big of a deal as it's coming off. I think a lot of people are misinterpreting.

rocksthecourt November 8 2011, 06:03:42 UTC

Yeah, I know I certainly misinterpreted. Jeez... I didn't think that was what was being suggested at all. I thought it was asking for a bunch of posts within a relatively short matter of time. Yeah 8-12 posts within a 6 week period is nothing at all.

...... Okay, even though I feel really dumb and really wish LJ would let you edit comments once they've been responded to so that isn't all immortalized forever, I'm really glad that was cleared up. That was... seriously my issue with this whole thing and what was making me so unsure. Tch, man.

Okay, just... forget pretty much everything I just said. Oy.

purpletaint November 8 2011, 06:38:40 UTC

Yeah, exactly. It's easily done even with slow posting or dropped threads--hell, if you didn't post all day, you could do a solitary NS and tag at least twenty times within two days. XDD

So, yeah. =/ I hope people are understanding. It's not as bad as people are making it out to be.

gald_digger November 8 2011, 06:31:27 UTC

I think your last point is a really important one to consider, even if part of it was initially a misunderstanding.

With the 'last post must be within x days of the end of NS' rule, players who post to NS but not DS would pass, but players who post to DS but not NS would fail. The other requirements could also be achieved within NS, without ever posting to DS. This seems like a big flaw.

rocksthecourt November 8 2011, 06:49:32 UTC

Maybe I shouldn't speak since I obviously don't know all the details, but since the whole cycle is being taken into account, maybe something like that would be negated if the person officially announced a hiatus for NS? It seems like hiatuses and threadmate activity are being officially considered with respect to everything anyway, so it might be less worrisome for someone who announces their absence rather than someone who simply goes MIA for a few weeks.

Back to all threads