New Activity Check Requirements

[mayfield_mods]

Activity Check!

No, just kidding. As we said, since the transfer happened so recently and caused so much upheaval, we’re skipping AC again this month. Our next check will begin on March 12.

This announcement is to let you know that after some discussion, the mods have decided that for the next Activity Check will be trying out a change to our activity requirements. We feel this change has been coming for a while; we have a far easier standard than both games our size, and we’ve been getting a lot more comments recently about character sitting. So beginning in March, rather than our previous requirement of a thread four of your comments long or a post seven sentences or longer, we will be requiring:

Threads

• 3 Threads four of your comments long
• Threads provided must involve at least three different characters
• IF you do not have 3 that meet this length, we’ll consider 5 threads that do not quite meet the requirement.

 

OR
 

Post

• Threads in the post approximate the 3 threads standard
• If threads do not meet that standard, we will examine the timestamps on comments to decide if you were making a reasonable effort.
• There is no longer a length requirement for the post itself.
   

This may be a little confusing because the standard is pretty subjective, but in practice it shouldn’t be. What we’re actually asking for is 3 Threads with 3 Different Characters where you have replied 4 times or a post with 3 Threads where you have replied about 4 times. If you have that, great, you’re done! You’ve passed Activity Check.

The subjectivity comes in if you don’t have that. We think this is a reasonable standard, but at the same time we don’t want to penalize people if their post doesn’t get many replies or if they have threads dropped on them. We really prefer you do the above (especially because checking 5 threads or timestamps is more work on our part), but if you haven’t been able to do that, we’re willing to give you a little leeway to show you’ve still been active.

With regards to checking timestamps on posts, what we mean is we’ll be seeing if the person who dropped the threads was you or the person you were threading with, and in deciding that we’ll be looking at both the last comment in the thread but also when that comment was posted to make sure no one is going back and tagging old threads just to slide through AC. We’ll also be keeping in mind whether your post which isn’t getting many tags was posted right in time for you to try to make AC with it; if we see you consistently doing this over a few checks, we’ll stop accepting it unless it meets the full thread requirement.

If your post or threads don’t meet our standard, we’ll reply to your comment saying what else we need to see from you (another thread, 2 more threads, etc.), and then you’ll go on the warned list until we see what’s needed. We won’t be giving you time to give us more links before the warned list goes up because it would double or triple our already considerable AC workload, but being on the warned list doesn’t have any negative consequences.

If you have any technical issues or questions about this, we’re happy to hear them. If you have general objections, such as not wanting us to increase AC standard at all, we’re going to ask you to wait until March. This isn’t necessarily going to be our new system, but we would like to try it out for a month before we make a permanent decision.

Thanks!

Comments

[hisnameisthecaptain]

If a technical error occurs (bad link on our part or a mod accidentally missing someone's AC check because it's a big game) do we still have time to fix the issue or are we stuck on warned list until next check?

Just wondering. I know I'd stress it if I had to wait until the next AC to see if the fix was taken care of or if I am now dropped.

[mayfield_mods]

Well that's not really how it works. You mean put on the warned list for this AC? It's going to be the exact same way as before, it's just that the thread requirements are longer.

Yes, if there's a technical error, you will go on the warned list. The reason is not to punish you; it's because we check AC right before we put the warned list up and there is not time to let people correct mistakes. It would just cause us a lot of extra work to do it that way.

But if you are warned, you won't be stressed until next AC? You'll just be on the list until you supply links/show us the error, and then you'll be taken off before the warned list is dropped.

[hisnameisthecaptain]

Sounds good. Thanks.

[likes2havesex]

For the check on the 12th, how far back are posts eligible?
I guess I mean, do our eligible threads start on the 1st of March or do they go back into Feb some?

[mayfield_mods]

They start Feb 12

[likes2havesex]

Sweet

[struckbylightning]

Regarding newer characters that have been recently accepted: are they still exempt from AC for the first month?

[mayfield_mods]

Yes. The specific thread/post requirements is the only thing that's changing.

[struckbylightning]

Cool. Thank you!

[echoing_sutras]

Working with this new AC would be sincerely easier if we had tags on the log comm.

[mayfield_mods]

All right, we'll get those up and running.

[suchaprettybear]

For the post to count, you need 3 different people to comment on it? Does it count if you have longer threads with one or two people?

Or can you have more than one post if you can't get people to tag the first one?

[suchaprettybear]

Also: can we mix and match these requirements? Like, have a post where 2 people have commented and then have 1 thread elsewhere?

[redcinemareel]

These were the exact questions I was just thinking of!

[mayfield_mods]

Yes, you can mix and match like that, that's fine.

We do need 3 unique threads. However, as it says up there, if only 2 people reply to your post, we'll take that into consideration if you absolutely can't get another thread, and we'll try to determine if that was out of control. Like, if it was a post locked to only 2 people, that won't count, but if it was an open post and the threads with 2 people are long, we'll probably be ok with that.

[moemoetentacles]

This requirement seems to lean pretty heavily on the tagging behavior of other people in order to make AC. I'm kind of concerned about the many posts I see in the course of a standard month that get either no responses at all or very few responses. That's not really the fault of the poster. I know you didn't want general objections yet, but this is something that should probably be taken into consideration.

[achromous]

I don't see why you couldn't combine them? Say you make a post and two people reply. You can use those two threads and then just tag someone else once to get your third thread. If you get just one response then you tag two other people to get the requirement.

[moemoetentacles]

The original post by the mods doesn't mention anything about being able to mix and match the requirements, though. It's presented as an either/or situation - three threads on a post you made yourself, or three threads with other characters elsewhere. As the requirement currently reads, if you were to make a post that only gets two responses, and you also have two threads on other peoples' posts, you'd still fail AC, because you failed to meet either requirement. Maybe I'm misinterpreting this, but if that's the case, it's something that needs to be cleared up anyway.

[achromous]

I guess I was looking at it from the "they didn't say it had to be threads in different posts" angle, so you could just link to each thread separately. I think a combination like that would be reasonable, since you're essentially providing the exact same amount of activity.

[moemoetentacles]

I dunno. I guess I don't see why the requirement isn't only "three threads of 4 comments, regardless of their source" in that case, rather than splitting it out into two distinct scenarios.

[vytis]

I think what I took away from it was that if you didn't want to track down three separate threads you could just use one link by way of a post.

[mayfield_mods]

It has been taken into consideration. As we said up there, if you submit a post or threads that don't have enough replies, we'll look at the timestamps and timing of the post/threads and determine who dropped them. For our purposes we really prefer you submit the exact requirements specified, but this post is so long because we went into detail about what to do if you don't have enough activity because of being thread-dropped or not getting any replies. I don't think there's any more we can do to help with that than has already been done and spelled out.

[battymadam]

I kind of agree that this new system depends on other people's behavior too much. I think it'd be better with the option to make a post remain the same as it ever was: Based on the post length itself, not the threads within. If someone put a lot of effort into a post and gets no tags, they shouldn't have to scramble.

But I agree that if you're ONLY submitting threads, more than just one with four comments is reasonable. That way people don't skate by on playing only with their friends.

[achromous]

I don't think scrambling would be necessary if, in addition to making a post, you were also regularly tagging out. Sure if that post was the only activity you had all month you'd be forced to do some last-minute activity grabs, but if you're regularly relying on posts with no replies to make AC wouldn't you want to tag out more so more people tagged you back anyway?

[roadroller]

Regardless, it's the principle of the thing. I feel like if posts are basically the exact same thing as threads in terms of AC, when normally you had a choice in how you made your AC, then well, it devalues posting a little. It's not so much about whether or not they actually have to scramble, and more about rewarding people for their posts.

[vytis]

I can see that sort of point of view. On the other hand, is it fair to allow someone to just post once a month right before AC to slide by?

[roadroller]

Just posting isn't the same as just threading, in my opinion. What posting does is give people a chance to approach you for CR. So if you do that every month, I don't really care about your reasons. Not everyone has a ton of spare time. Some characters aren't very social. You know?

Of course, someone who always posts and gets tagged and doesn't reply to ANYONE deserves to be complained about, but I honestly haven't seen anyone who does that on a regular basis. I think the act of posting itself should be motivation enough to tag back.

[corrodes]

I'll reply from as many journals as I want okay

Yeah, I think posting should be rewarded on the one hand, but I do think in general the AC should be a bit harder for Mayfield, given its size and speed, and just requiring a post could create even more posts that no one replies to because they're also all busy making posts.

[roadroller]

Maybe but I kinda doubt it... there are still going to be people who prefer tagging around. It's not like the new AC requirements for threading are so hard that posting would be the obvious choice. They're still pretty doable.

[corrodes]

Yeah, I think they're doable, it just seems like that's what everyone's worried about so I got the impression most people were planning on using posts for their AC.

[roadroller]

Haha, I've been getting the opposite impression. All I've been hearing about is "How am I gonna keep track of my threads so I can use them for AC?" so it seems they're planning to do it by threads. I think it would all balance out in the end.

[mayfield_mods]

See, we want to encourage people to tag rather than to make long posts. What we don't want to see is people throwing up a long post just to make AC but not really threading with the people who respond. But as I said to Brandon, if you post but don't get many replies, that's something we'll take into consideration. We just want to see effort to be active!

[thegreatsaiyaman]

The AC requirements mention both Threads and Posts, but how do Log posts deal with this? Do they count in the same ways? Sorry if this is something that's known, but I'm kinda new here still. :)

[jumpsinline]

This is a question I had as well! I don't do prose style logs ever often, but would those count any differently since those sort of TL;DR style tags take more effort to crank out for most situations?

[mayfield_mods]

Log posts will count the same way threads do, but if there's IC writing in the initial post we can count that as one of the 4 needed replies.