paradisamods: (Default)
PARADISA MODS ([personal profile] paradisamods) wrote in [community profile] paradisaooc2011-10-01 05:59 pm
Entry tags:

ACTIVITY CHECK DISCUSSION

Hey guys!

So there's been some confusion and disagreement about what should/should not count for activity check, what is counted where, etc. So this is a post where we'd like to discuss revamping the activity check system with you! Once we can get a clear idea of what everyone feels is fair, it will make it easier for us to have a clear system where everyone understands the activity requirements desired of each character in Paradisa.


SECTIONS:

What do you think should count for a post?
What should constitute thread "size"?
What should constitute comment "quality"?
How much should the mods be responsible for? The players?
How should a thread on a log be judged?
ext_934189: (What's going on?)

[identity profile] tehoniongirl.livejournal.com 2011-10-01 10:32 pm (UTC)(link)
But a lot of times that happens because it would actually be bad writing for every post to be massive in length. Sometimes you just need a quick line of dialogue.

I think the difference is the prospective time a log could take. Will some people cheat the system? Yes. Will players be frustrated? Yes. But they can bring their concerns to the mod team if a specific player is skating by.

Asking you to regulate prose tags vs. actionspam tags and thread length and posting time and style of AC is a ridiculous amount to keep track of, a lot more work than the mod team should need to do, and too controlling of how players need to play.

I don't like character squatting either, but I feel like we're all getting a little too up in arms over it right now. I don't think we need a ton of restrictions. The Log posts generally counted as more because they (potentially) are more effort. That seems like a fair enough assessment to me.
valerie: (Disney Castle ♥)

[personal profile] valerie 2011-10-01 10:36 pm (UTC)(link)
As I said, I totally agree. But at the same time, that's also saying that a reply on the main community should take less time to come up with than a reply on the logs community. Of course, this isn't true in every instance. I can think of countless times when I have sat and thought about a reply in the main comm, or when main comm threads turn quite serious and require a lot more effort to the point where they pretty much ARE a log.

Really, I'm just trying to understand the difference between activity on the main community versus activity on the logs community. Right now it seems (based on what I'm reading) that if you can't make a post or you can't reply to threads in the main community, all you need to do is reply to a thread on the logs community, place your character's tag on the entry, and call it a day.

I totally understand that in the past some activity checks have allowed this for whatever reason, but I'm curious as to why we all feel that it is acceptable activity.
ext_934189: (Default)

[identity profile] tehoniongirl.livejournal.com 2011-10-01 10:39 pm (UTC)(link)
Touche... and I definitely see where you're coming from.

Honestly, my main opinion on logs is based on the closed vs. open prospect.

An open log where anyone can tag in...I guess I don't see how that should be treated as different from a post in the comm.

But the closed logs feel more like joint posts. Even if one member is slow, I feel like that should count.
valerie: (Lucky Star - Ayano sweatdrop)

[personal profile] valerie 2011-10-01 10:44 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh definitely! If it's a closed log, both participants (or however many there are) get credit for the post. That was never an issue.

It's more the "Nepeta and YOU!" logs that I am confused with, as that is essentially like making an open post on the main community, just in third person.

[identity profile] matchmaker.livejournal.com 2011-10-01 11:07 pm (UTC)(link)
I tagged into two of Christina's logs this past month three times between my two characters (meaning Angel and Cupid tagged into one log, and another time with just Angel tagging into the second log and not ... three comments from me total between them).

Although her logs were originally listed as "Harmony and YOU" or whatever, we discussed them beforehand and I planned to tag into them when she posted them, so you can't always go off of lack of closed log for this type of thing.
Edited 2011-10-01 23:08 (UTC)
valerie: (Disney Castle ♥)

[personal profile] valerie 2011-10-01 11:13 pm (UTC)(link)
The same could easily be said for an open post in the main community. One could make an open post, but plan to thread with someone specifically. Why wouldn't that count, though? Why would the log thread be any different?

[identity profile] matchmaker.livejournal.com 2011-10-01 11:21 pm (UTC)(link)
Spamming comments to the main community and tagging into a log are two different experiences, as far as I'm concerned. Replies to posts are generally done quickly and take little effort. Replies to logs can also be that way, but they are generally ... I don't want to say harder, but they tend to take a little more thought and effort from my own experience. This is my opinion and I'm sure not everyone agrees--but ask yourself why so many people do actionspam in the main community versus posting up a log?

I guarantee that part of the reason is that it's easier/faster/or more convenient.
valerie: (Default)

[personal profile] valerie 2011-10-01 11:24 pm (UTC)(link)
But that's making a generalization. Not everyone's posts on the main community are like that. Just like not everyone's log posts are as in-depth and time consuming as is being generalized.

To me, they are equal and should be treated as such. I don't think that one way of replying to someone should be considered any different than replying to another. Therefore, and this is just my personal opinion coming out, a thread in the logs community shouldn't count as a post if a thread in the main community doesn't.

[identity profile] matchmaker.livejournal.com 2011-10-01 11:28 pm (UTC)(link)
We have to agree to disagree then. I mean, it comes down to my opinion differing from yours, and while I can see where you're coming from on paper I can only speak to my own experiences and not anyone else's re: posting tags to journal entries versus posting tags to logs, and I already laid that out for you above.
Edited 2011-10-01 23:30 (UTC)
valerie: (Disney Castle ♥)

[personal profile] valerie 2011-10-01 11:33 pm (UTC)(link)
But therein lies another problem. It's differing opinions, which we are all entitled to! But how do we all reach a compromise as far as AC guidelines are concerned? The goal is, above all, to reach a solution we can all agree on. (Or at the very least, tolerate, so we can continue to have fun in Paradisa.)

[identity profile] matchmaker.livejournal.com 2011-10-01 11:43 pm (UTC)(link)
I honestly think the mods need to take a more hands off approach as some have suggested already. I have a paper due tonight so I am going to be brief here but:

1) Have players post their own activity each month to make less work for you and more accountability for us.

2) Stop monitoring everything so closely. I swear I have seen more charts in this place than anywhere else in my life.

3) If it's not broke, don't fix it. Leave the activity rules alone instead of making them more arbitrary/complicated.

4) If people are really that inactive or squatting, approach them. If castmates and CR are not coming to you guys to complain then what's the problem? Honestly.

Paradisa already has the most complicated activity check related stuff from any game I've ever been in. Deciding what counts over what and making more ways to track stuff just ... I can't see it helping at all. It should be straightforward as laid out for us countless times in the past when AC is brought up--a combination of two posts or participation in two logs or any combination. If people are dropping threads or abusing this system then step in. If you don't notice it and no one else cares enough to go to a mod about it then it's obviously not a problem.
Edited 2011-10-01 23:45 (UTC)

[identity profile] ardens-musebox.livejournal.com 2011-10-01 11:45 pm (UTC)(link)
Very well said, on all fronts. I agree with all these things.

[identity profile] noworldleft.livejournal.com 2011-10-01 11:46 pm (UTC)(link)
So do I.
encourage: (calm; watching from over here)

[personal profile] encourage 2011-10-02 12:51 am (UTC)(link)
plus three or whatever we're on number-wise. Make us accountable, let players come to you to complain about individuals squatting/etc., keep things clearcut and straightforwrad as far as what "counts" for AC.

[identity profile] tomatoandbasil.livejournal.com 2011-10-02 01:13 am (UTC)(link)
We're all pretty mature here; the fact that we're hashing this out rather assertively rather than screaming and having a barfight in this post right now is proof enough. We can be accountable for ourselves and each other; the mods don't need to monitor everything constantly.

It'd make it easier for everyone. +1 to this

[identity profile] saccharosium.livejournal.com 2011-10-02 01:33 am (UTC)(link)
I agree with everything in this comment.

[identity profile] spongetastic.livejournal.com 2011-10-02 02:07 am (UTC)(link)
After reading through all these comments, I have to agree that being accountable for your own AC seems like a great solution. It wouldn't be very difficult. You just make a document on your computer and put your tags/logs/posts there as they happen so that when the AC comes you can just copy+paste.

And if you miss it for whatever reason, we've seen from previous ACs how other players are more than willing to go thread-hunting for people.