IMPORTANT POLL: Activity Check Alterations

[burningvigor]

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

Comments

[doneinthree]

Didn't we just recently make AC stricter by shortening the active period from two weeks to one week? If the concern is characters taking months to idle out of the game, then it seems to me like "need to have been active in the past week" plus "more frequent activity checks" would take care of that just as quickly as this proposed system

[purpletaint]

On the first thing, it's still two weeks currently.

[doneinthree]

Sorry, high off cold meds now LOL. But my point still stands, why don't we just keep the old system and shorten it to one week?

[purpletaint]

The last one states clearly that it's within the last two weeks that it's needed. For the rest, I've commented elsewhere about it. I'm sorry, I don't mean to be rude, I just don't want to rehash again. =(

[gald_digger]

I don't have a problem with the proposed requirements at all, but I agree with the people who are worried that this might be overcomplicating things.

I think an important thing to consider is newcomers to damned. When they ask about the AC, are they going to get scared away by seeing something this detailed when they already have so many other things to figure out and keep track of? I know many who'll immediately pass over a game if the AC looks like a pain, even if it's technically easy to pass

[sheepwood]

I agree with everything in this, especially the part about newcomers. They already pass us by for the still-infamous-even-though-it's-been-toned-down application and the fact that this game is just unlike any other in LJ. Getting a system that will take a lengthy page to explain all the little details seems like we're not doing ourselves any favors.

But yes, smaller steps might help us rather than implementing something that does look like a demon for both mods and players already.

[purpletaint]

I understand your concern, but what's proposed is actually closer to how every other game does ACs. It's not something new or daunting. I can list some examples for people if needed of other games that use this system--actually, it's normally stricter than this.

[gald_digger]

Damned is already fundamentally different from other games in so many ways, though. What works for another game with a different format and structure isn't necessarily what's going to work for us.

edit: And it's definitely not 'every' game that does this. I've seen plenty of games get by just fine with a "hey I'm still here" type AC. The bigger issues are player motivation and communication, which aren't going to be fixed by a more complicated AC.

Since it seems like a few are misinterpreting.

[purpletaint]

What this change is suggesting is that two things will be asked for in each AC.

A) One post within the last time frame (7-14 days, depending on voting).

B) Proof of 8-12 (depending on voting) posts in the entirety of the DS/NS cycle--which is to say, six weeks.

That's all.

[bitpartgod]

I MESSED UP AND CLICKED 'YES' INSTEAD OF 'NO' THE FIRST TIME, so I revoted with this account. Really sorry about that, just ignore scalyfishman. /)_(\

[herr_inspektor]

OKAY coming back a little while later, I think it's important to ask: what are the aims of changing the AC? I'm a little confused as to whether it's to weed out character squatters or to improve the overall activity of the game, and those are two pretty distinct aims and I don't want to get my wires crossed before I say anything else.

[terriblehaiku]

I voted 'no' because while I have no problem with the first two items in this new policy, the last one is still a non-starter for me. It's not because I really don't think I couldn't make it, but because it will bring up a bunch of problems that I don't really think the game needs

[purpletaint]

Just as an FYI, for the second paragraph, that's done already and it's never been a big deal. I've had to do that I think three times in the past year because one of mine was past the two week activity thing because I never got a reply back to NS. It's not outing anyone. You just say you haven't gotten a response yet, and the mods take it into consideration. I don't think people even look at those enough to have a list of people to "shun," or whatever, in all honesty.

[terriblehaiku]

Except that this whole debate is happening because people started complaining about slow posters, so people are watching. And while they may not actively avoid tagging people at the moment, there's not a lot riding on AC right now, either. I can definitely see that changing if people suddenly have to watch how many tags they're getting done. It may not be a conscious 'I won't tag with so-and-so because they're slow' but it could easily become 'I will tag so-and-so because they'll get my AC done.' Which is a crappy reason to pick CR for your characters.

That said, it's really only a minor part of several concerns I have, so even if that never happens, this still isn't a system I can vote 'yes' on.

[blind_nights]

Hate to say it, but there already is a phenomenon of people picking threadmates precisely because there is a possibility of people not posting for a week and still passing the current AC. So having lines in the sand wouldn't necessarily be a new thing with AC changes, you know?