Comments | mona_moore: poll time

mona_moore

poll time

Dec 19, 2002 10:29

Look here for my definition of "repeated use".

Poll 9 Week Rule

Comments 27

tony__lovato December 19 2002, 09:28:57 UTC

some people have emergencys and cant always get on a computer. however, if someone updates once every six weeks it really isnt fair to someone else who wants the role. you have to be devoted to your role, and if you like your role but dont give it the attention it deserves and more than once, give it up. its really not fair to the others that would do it justice and frequently update.

mona_moore December 19 2002, 09:33:26 UTC

That's the hard thing here: trying to find the perfect balance between protecting those who have justifiable reasons to not be around and weeding out those who are hogging roles.

tony__lovato December 19 2002, 09:36:59 UTC

its a busy season, so there probably is a lot of that going around.

however, those whom are having a time of crisis or are very busy for a brief period of time should post up a note so everyone knows. but, even if they are busy, if it happens more than once the role should go to someone else's. the old tony never updated, except when it was closing in on nine weeks. its really not fair for someone to keep a role they'll never update, not fair to the person who wants to play it, not fair to the person they're playing and not fair to the original roleplayer that made the journal in the first place.

hard_roc December 19 2002, 10:04:43 UTC

Yeah, but what if everyone who didn't update regularly was adopted by someone who has multiple roles? There would no good roles available to newbies.

Thread 7

benji__madden December 19 2002, 12:25:53 UTC

what do you do when no one will rec you in and you don't want someone to take over your role? lately a lot of people have been saying "oh, well you're not in must be pop, so i can clone you" in the 'punk' section of the rpg. i'm scared to lose my role or have anyone around trying to take it. what can i do?

christina_a December 19 2002, 17:23:21 UTC

you can have me rec you, lovely.

adkins December 24 2002, 22:55:48 UTC

Whilst thou rec me, o fair maiden?

christina_a January 17 2003, 16:24:25 UTC

i will rec you five times in one night.

dita_von_teese December 19 2002, 13:25:50 UTC

Personally, this is what I think. Nine weeks is a good rule of thumb, but it's pretty obvious when someone's just updating enough to stay within the 9 week rule. It's no wonder why you have some that make clone journals. Because usually when that happens, the "original" comes back with a post saying that they love the role, etc. Only to turn around and - suprise - not update.

I think they should get one chance. Just one. Because if they repeat it, it's likely that they'll keep repeating it. It's not fair to other players, and it's taking up a role that someone else could probably play with a more dedication.

I'm all for changing to six weeks. Of course, this is only my opinion, but there you have it.

damon__albarn December 19 2002, 15:24:42 UTC

I completely agree that it should be six weeks. Some people don't realize exactly how long a month is when it comes to character journals. Nine weeks is an impossibly long amount of time to have a character inactive. Entire storylines can take place in nine weeks. If you lose interest in your journal and stop updating for six weeks, chances are you aren't going to finish in the last three unless it's to just keep the character for the sake of keeping it.

If someone really needs a break away from it all and needs more than six week I doubt anyone has a problem with them making a post of "Taking two months off." The point of the journal really is to keep it updated, else why have it all?

alex_james December 21 2002, 16:13:24 UTC

I agree with nearly everything he said, especially the last sentence.

k_richardson December 19 2002, 13:50:25 UTC

I think we should keep it 9 weeks. If you take it down to 6 you might as well take it down to 4/1 month. Because if a person is gone for a whole 2 months the really have had the time to consider whether they want the role. Less time and people are more likely to do the "repeated use" thing. and a couple times doing that should be enough.

christina_a December 19 2002, 17:24:22 UTC

I emphatically agree.

sliminem December 19 2002, 20:29:48 UTC

[I thought about bring this subject up a few weeks ago, but I didn't know of anything we could do to solve it -- so I stayed quiet. Here is my take on it...

I think a six week cut may be somewhat drastic. Some of us don't know a lot of people they trust OOC, because they keep that part of this game away from them -- so when they have an issue, they are unable to update to make the time to keep the role. I think the two-month wait is fine as is, for now ( ... )