[@AimeChambers] -- I'll write up something for Lance, if you don't mind. Question is, where would you like Ainsley to be found in / at? Just so I have a general idea on where to send Lance or where Lance will spot him. 

[@SleepingSilence] -- Ah! I should've had pinged you for that instance. I started writing, and wasn't sure whom to ping and who not to ping (especially since it was first-post session, thinking everyone would see and read it), given that sometimes characters would just be talking about other characters. I shall keep note of that.

Hm. Wisp did mention posting within a week's time, so I'm guessing it's coincidence. (I'm sure they have already responded to you by now because I'm still writing this and more out.) I wanted to clarify the rule in case it came off as confusing, while they just kinda went ahead with their statement as sort of a reminder to everyone. I kinda do now come off as rude for doing such, so I apologize if that's the sort of message I sent. I only wished to clear things up and hoped that this rule didn't come off as a surprise to anyone. I shouldn't need to do "post a monkey at the end of your profile if you read the rules!" because, well, all should've read the rules. I shouldn't actually had to bring this up now that I think about it, but I was afraid that the rule was misunderstood due to wording. (Specifically, as stated before, the "your last post" portion. I believe I already explained why in the other post.)

I decided to throw the rest under the spoiler due to the amount I wrote. 

[hider=discussion on four-day posting and turn order]
So, I stated within the rule the following, after the primary statement: "If you do not, you will be skipped or be adapted to the roleplay as seen fit. / This applies to the waited-on player. This rule will ignore players who are waiting on another player to respond." I wanted the rule to mean that there is a time that players have for responding because if we stopped everything, waiting for this one person to respond, and they never do, then it kinda has some of us at a stand-still. I don't intend for the roleplay to play out like a NASCAR track, so I believe four days should be a fair amount of waiting time while not having the roleplay die because one player or two couldn't respond. Sure, you can overlook them, but I think it'd be rude to do this without people knowing ahead of time. Since the situation was bound to come up, I wrote the rule ahead of time.

The rule ideally works with posting order as a way to keep track of who's turn it is to respond next. Person 1 will make a post, and it is person 2's turn, but person 2 does not post within four days. I would hope that within the four days, the GM or co-GM would be told by person 2 that they cannot post within the given time. Person 2 may leave a general outline of what they want their character to do and that outline will be respected. We can assume that happened and proceed with the roleplay. I hope that will not be abused; I can only allow such to happen for a short period of time before that player has every action based on an outline posted in the OOC. 

If two people are battling each other, say person 2 and person 5, person 5 is discouraged from immediately responding to person 2 because then person 3 and person 4 will have four days to respond among a wave of things that person 2 and person 5 have been posting in-between what's going on; person 3 or person 4 might've had something to say to person 5 before hand depending on the setting, and then they've just been overlooked. So with turn order and four day rule, person 2 and person 5 battle within their given order by person 2 responding, then 3, then 4, and then 5. If person 3 doesn't respond and then person 4 doesn't respond, then person 5 can respond after eight days have passed (person 3 gets four days, so does person 4, and person 5 can step up and post for their battle stuff). If person 4 is present in the battle and cannot write their response within the time period, they may leave an outline for their character's actions so person 5 and person 2 have a general idea on what to respond to. It would be nice to ping and alert people to let them know that it is their time to respond and to not leave them in the dark, unknowing that it's their turn to post. 

If someone hasn't been given anything to respond to for their post, they may choose to be skipped for their turn. This would imply that they don't do anything with their character for that time. Even if someone has a post that is lonesome and independent on the post of others, if it adds something to the roleplay, whether for their own character's aspects (their likes and dislikes, attitude towards others, thoughts, whatever it may be and etc.), the world, and so on, then I highly encourage for the player to write that post within their given turn spot.

Skipping over someone isn't my preference. I'd rather have the player, who knows that they cannot respond within four days, to drop off an ideal outline of what their character would do or say rather than presuming that the player's character is simply silent. Skipping over them is to presume that they haven't done anything with that character for the time being. If two players are generating a conversation with their characters and one player does not respond in time or leave an outline, then it's simply best to not assume anything out of their character. Perhaps proceed with the conversation as a character would if they were given a time of silence. If a player leaves the roleplay while their character is mid-conversation, have the character ease on out of that conversation because there will be no more responded from that player. 

Given that I have stated the four-day rule earlier under the Rules header (even though the wording is odd now that I look at it, still referring to "your last post" portion), I would've hoped that players are prepared for it. If someone comes back within four days and noticed they were skipped, I would hope that they remembered this rule. Perhaps down the road of the roleplay this may occur. Player 3 misses their turn to post, but player 4 is okay with them still posting for as long as player 3 is prepared and ready to post immediately? It'd only be rude to immediately shut player 3 down, but if player 3 does not respond within that day, then player 4 should proceed with their post. If player 3 insisted that they would be ready within three days, player 3 shouldn't post and instead let player 4 post. They may still leave a quick outline if player 4 is okay with it, since player 4's post may depend on player 3's post. If it doesn't and say that player 6's post depended on player 3's post, then player 3 may leave an outline for player 6, and honestly any other player possibly affected by what their outline has. Since it has been stated, I would have hoped for players to be prepared for it. Having players pinged for when it is their turn would be great as much as pinging anyone who's characters are affected by the surroundings of the roleplay. (Though yes, my first post did lack the latter, and I apologize for that still.)

So, once urukhai posts, I'll post. Then I'll ping Wisp and they'll post, then they'll ping Monsi, and so on. Though, of course, urukhai could also ping Monsi if Wisp didn't ping them. You could even ping Wisp if I failed to do so. (If I failed to do so,  dishonor on my cow.) To ping the next player to post immediately after you have posted is highly recommended. I'd rather have this ping in OOC; characters / players affected by your decisions IC should be pinged within IC, but the next one to post should be pinged OOC in case that next player isn't involved in the previous events. 

Returning to your question, if a player has been skipped, they will have to find a way to adapt their character for their next post. I imagine that no battle should start with this player's character(s); if character 1 throws a jug at character 2 and character 2 is being played by a player who isn't present and didn't leave an outline to assume a respond with, then the next post character 1 makes can either be skipped (if that's what the player wishes) or to be written without assumption of what character 2 would do next. I would hope that the player of character 2 will come back in time to be smacked upside the head by a jug, or perhaps to catch it with one hand for... for a reason that player better justify because I can't buy into the idea off the bat. Or honestly, with whatever character 2 wishes to respond with.

While your idea [i]seams[/i] (I'm funny. Laugh damn it.) great, I may not do it exactly like the way you described. Perhaps I may be misunderstanding it. I honestly wouldn't wish to automatically give control of someone's character to another person, or even myself for that matter, unless that person specifically requests for it. I wouldn't wish to do this. Outlines, when given, should already give players enough of a guidance for the roleplay if players were to continue without that specific player for a post. If the player is quiet and doesn't post, communicate, or discuss with fellow players or GM, I will not do anything with their character. That's it. I suppose it's a respect thing, but I can understand that many may not see it as such.

For further more technicalities on the expiration of the four days, it will be based on how old the last post the player made before you is. It will not be based off of four days pacific time or four days central time. I know that this isn't completely fair for everyone, giving some more or less hours to compose a post, but I believe it's an agreeable way to keep track of the time. 

On the account of posting order, if someone posts out of order... It wouldn't be highly preferred. If at any point that we all agree that we should change the posting order for the sake of the story, then so be it, but I'm not sure if we'll have to do that anytime soon or hopefully ever. If we must though, I won't be stubborn about it.[/hider]

I hope this answered your questions and concerns correctly. I am willing to adapt as seen fit, but I feel certain about the decisions and discussion presented.