[War_ooc] Activity requirement?

[John Penta]

Well, once every two weeks is because I only plan on releasing the WR
every two weeks. (I retain the *option* of doing a weekly WR, hence
progressing WAR-time by a week, but I question the feasibility of
that. I'm currently confused by what everybody wants to see in the WR,
so I don't have a template drawn up.)

My hope is that peer pressure will work when the pace of activity
steps up. I mean it when I say the success or failure of this
incarnation of WAR depends on the playerbase. Collect each other's AIM
screen names, poke each other. Keep conversations going, but also try
to spur activity by your fellow players.

For what its worth, I intend to be fairly liberal in granting excuses
to any activity policy - I think, from my end, it's more important
that there be one than that it necessarily be strictly enforced. It's
meant to provide a guideline - "You broke the activity requirement,
you go byebye" is not the idea. More "Hey, man, there is an activity
requirement for WAR. Where've you -been-?" It's more meant to be a
stick to back up basic courtesy (ie, those people on the Internet do
worry about you when you don't say anything for a while; say something
so we know you ain't dead!), not a strictly enforced measure.

In short, it's more important to deal with cases where someone drops
off the face of the internet than when they just don't post much.

Not posting much is more important to me when it's done by multiple
people, because then I go "What's wrong with the game?" and "Is the
game still alive?"

Of which I should note, I'll probably ask the latter question at an
earlier point than we ever did with WAR prior to its previous demise.
It was incredibly demoralizing to see WAR sputter to a stop last time,
something which will probably lead me to be a fanatic about activity
and general game health this time.

John

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 7:56 AM, Iain<iain at iain-waddell.co.uk> wrote:
> I completely agree that a minimum posting requirement would be a good idea.
> If nothing else it means we have something to get our asses in gear and keep
> us writing.
>
> However, given how WAR usually moves when it gets going, should we not be
> thinking of a once-weekly requirement rather than one-a-fortnight? It would
> be easier to keep the game going, keep a tab on players and any potential
> problems. Of course, being excused for periods when required would still be
> very much an option.
>
> Just my thoughts on the matter
>
> Iain
> Aka
> Canada