ACTIVITY CHECK DISCUSSION

[paradisamods]

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?

Comments

[saccharosium.livejournal.com]

Regardless of who posts the log or the entry, if a character is involved in some way with the contents of that log/entry, they should get credit for it. And as far as tagging a character's name onto an entry/log, this is how i have always seen it:

— If players A & B have their characters on a log, then both characters have their names tagged onto the log. The same applies for a joint post.

— If there is an event post going on, such as a wedding, a party, a battle plot, an open log, etc., players have always tagged their characters' names onto the post. There was never any rule to the contrary to not do that, and there was never any discussion up until now about whether or not it was a good or bad idea to do it.


A comment to a log takes much more thought and work on a player's part than a comment to an entry does. Players A and B could have threaded a 100+ comment thread with no more than four to five lines of text in each comment (and majority of the time, comments in an entry are one- or two-liners), and of course the collapsed thread makes it seem like more went on within the thread. Meanwhile, Players C & D are busting out four to five lines minimum of text for their log. Third-person logs take more thought and effort, because some players really want to capture the feeling of how their characters are feeling then and there, plus incorporate actions and speech into that log, while first-person threads are instant and observers can understand the tone of the thread with a snap of their fingers.

[orz-woeisme.livejournal.com]

So counting that both comments to a log and comments to a post should count as AC, why should comments to a log count as "one post for the month" while comments to an entry not? Or do you think that both should count as "posts for the month"?

Right now whoever participates in a log/entry has that count for over all AC. But commenting to an entry (when it isn't joint) does not count as a character having an entry, which is why they wind up on the thread count posts. I assumed having a character comment to a log (when it isn't joint) wouldn't count for a post either!

[matchmaker.livejournal.com]

It sounds like you, the mods, are the ones pushing for a change here when the players seem fine with things as they have been. What is the sudden push for change when in past how's the game posts, you have all decided against activity policy change when it was brought up by players? It seems very out of left field and weird to me. Also, I am not entirely comfortable with the way you ask us for our opinions here and then bombard us with things like "so why should that comment count and not this one?" Maybe I am reading into it but it comes off as strong arming to me in a way.

[orz-woeisme.livejournal.com]

I just want to say again--I didn't mean to enforce this as a change. I thought things had always been like this since I joined the game back in 2009 so for me this has been the reality of my stay in Paradisa. I've admitted I've never done AC nor do I participate in monitoring it so I haven't...actually seen how it gets done! But from how I read that rules that's what I thought happened.

As far as strong arming goes--I don't actually know what that means--I'm just asking those sorts of questions because in my head it doesn't seem logical or make sense ): I don't understand what I'm reading. I'm sorry if it comes off like that--I wasn't meant to be. I just genuinely do not understand some of what people are saying and I wanted better clarification.

[matchmaker.livejournal.com]

I appreciate that, and I'm sorry for accusing but it's just coming off like ... you are the ones who suddenly want this change/are questioning the way that AC has been done, and now you are arguing your points to try and get people to see it your way versus taking our input and leaving it at that. This is just the way that it came off to me and I am assuming so I could be wrong but I wanted to put it out there in case anyone felt the same or you weren't aware. But I will take you at your word because I don't think you are purposefully trying to influence people's decisions and instead are trying to get some input on their reasoning.

[orz-woeisme.livejournal.com]

Yeah--and I'm honestly sorry if it came off like that. I will go 100% with whatever the majority wants and I would never want to just ignore everyone in favor of my own opinion/ideas. It didn't feel like you were accusing at all either♥ So please don't worry about that. It's best to get the full picture than make assumptions and infer!

I don't want to step on anyone's opinions so thanks♥ I am going to try phrasing things a little more differently here now :)

[matchmaker.livejournal.com]

no u ♥