How can we help improve RPGuild? Community suggestions and discussion.

[Dion]

@Cynder I don't think it's worth it because no other forum is as tight knit as arena.

[mickilennial]

There's an idea that I thought of while scrolling through the Arena's commentary in regards to Buddha's suggestions - What if more sections were to include a similar "hangout/chat thread" similar to what Arena has? It's true that OOC/Off-Topic exists and anyone can make a thread chat there, but they're often shut down due to inactivity or become "clique-y". I think it could totally have some merits of uniting parts of the community with similar interests/Roleplaying styles.

@Cynder

Possibly your greatest idea.

[Cyndyr]

I don't think it's worth it because no other forum is as tight knit as arena.

@Buddha

This is definitely true, but that may very well be because of the fact that Arena has a thread where they can discuss topics with one another. The communication exists - as does the loyalty.

Possibly your greatest idea.

@Inkarnate

Why, thank you.

[Dion]

@Cynder Errrr. Maybe for NRP and tabletop and MAAAAAAAAAAYBE advanced. Big maybe. Casual and free? Fuck no. No reason not to try it but I doubt it'll work like it did in arena.

[Cyndyr]

@Cynder Errrr. Maybe for NRP and tabletop and MAAAAAAAAAAYBE advanced. Big maybe. Casual and free? Fuck no. No reason not to try it but I doubt it'll work like it did in arena.

@Buddha

Those sections are absolutely MASSIVE and perhaps it may not work as well for them as it did for Arena, but it could still be an interesting idea to put into place anyway. This, of course, is not anything that I would expect to be put on a priority list, it's just something that came to me while scrolling through Arena's thoughts.

[Dion]

Like I said there's no reason not to try it, but I imagine that it'd not be the same as arena.

[mickilennial]

Those sections are absolutely MASSIVE and perhaps it may not work as well for them as it did for Arena, but it could still be an interesting idea to put into place anyway. This, of course, is not anything that I would expect to be put on a priority list, it's just something that came to me while scrolling through Arena's thoughts.

@Cynder

Have the moderators sticky/pin it.

[Chao]

I am actually loving these ideas.

[The Harbinger of Ferocity]

With regard to comments made earlier, I would rather the Guild not migrate from an integrated chat on the site itself and exclusively on to a Discord. Two very different communities and policies in terms of general behavior and the usual visitors. I am not fond of Discord as it is, so I personally do not use it and I am still under the belief that the fact the Discord was made at all has detracted more than it has been of benefit simply because it isn't built into the Guild and is instead a separate site. The Guild by design should maintain its own activity on its chat, even if the average use is low and the larger number has moved on to it, of course barring if the entire thing was made one-for-one where but that is unlikely to be.

Moving on, the real reason I came here is because a topic about merging sections of the Nation Roleplays and Tabletop Roleplays came up. My opinion? Politely, no thank you. I am one for categorization and separation based upon the contents and overarching category they fall in. I would rather not throw a variety of often unrelated roleplaying genres, though with some overlap as they all have, into one area for the sake of them being "Other" or "Related to Advanced" rather than the traditional personalities of "Free, Casual, Advanced". It becomes a jumbled mess as people do not use tags at times, do not provide enough information in their topics and the weight of some topics in their posting rate will bog down and hide others with the current layout.

The real reason I believe these sections mind find themselves with issues goes back to the idea that most people are looking for "general" forms of roleplaying, not niches. Those niches are for the people looking for them specifically, but by that virtue alone they are not going to see as much traffic. Likewise, it makes it easier to search for them when you know exactly where they are. This does not mean they should be folded into others just for the sake of attempting to make them all more active. The issue with activity is that players are free to disappear with zero consequences or go for lengthy periods without posting, or so how I have seen it. My personal stance on that matter is, players who have that tendency should receive demerits against their account because their habit of vanishing poisons otherwise viable roleplays by helping kill activity; people are less likely to post when others become more inactive or no longer are there.

Yes, I do know some of these topics come late in the discussion but I hadn't the luxury until just now to refer to them.

[Dion]

@The Harbinger of Ferocity I do believe that issue was dropped already given a lengthy and good discussion with arena members specifically and they manage to convince me that my idea was perhaps not the right way to move forward. This doesn't fix inactivity though, which is an issue for another time and the inactivity of the arena board is certainly something that needs to be addressed at some point, regardless of 'this inactivity being inherent' to arena.

I disagree that we should demerit people that drop from RP's.

If your family member dies, I understand that you can't directly post that and I understand that that is something that might take a lot of time.
I am reluctant to ask, however, for proof of death. That's morbid and not right.

This goes for literally any other scenario just the same. I don't want to ask people for proof of why they disappeared.

So what, we either ban everyone that disappears for whatever reason. Good, then everyone with a valid reason is banned. Useful. Or we ban nobody.

I'd rather do the latter.

Engaging RP with people that disappear is BUYER BEWARE. It's your duty to check up on your partners to make sure they're not flaky or known for being shitty RP'ers. Not the moderators.

[AlteredTundra]

There's an idea that I thought of while scrolling through the Arena's commentary in regards to Buddha's suggestions - What if more sections were to include a similar "hangout/chat thread" similar to what Arena has? It's true that OOC/Off-Topic exists and anyone can make a thread chat there, but they're often shut down due to inactivity or become "clique-y". I think it could totally have some merits of uniting parts of the community with similar interests/Roleplaying styles.

@Cynder

Naruto Forums(Also known as "forum hero-academia") does this exact thing, and it's been proven to be rather successful. They have done it for as they have been a site(a bit over ten years iirc). So, I wholeheartedly support this idea. As @Inkarnate said, it's a wonderful idea. And who knows, it might just be a way to kill a few troublesome birds that have been brought up in this thread(and its previous incarnation) with one, accurate stone.

[Lady Absinthia]

@The Harbinger of Ferocity The dealing with people that flake out on Rp's is and should continue to the be the discretion of the GM. Each GM has a different opinion on how people who vanish are dealt with. Me personally, it is stated in my rules that you have to post every 7 days, end of story. You reach day 8, you're booted. If you need an extension you may have one but it must be requested for. There are always extenuating circumstances and for those I shelve characters until the person returns (Death in the family, moving, severe illness, etc.) and those are weighed on an individual basis. I keep a list of who has needed extensions, who has dropped, who fills out a CS and never makes a first post. After a time they just get a black mark in my private book and I don't let them join anymore.

With 1x1, it can be a little harder to do since it is just you and another but for me, I just follow similar rules for 1x1's as I do any other RP. This really isn't a mod issue because there is no rule on the forum that states "if you flake out you get the hammer", it's left to the individuals. People get a reputation though, so in a way they are punished in the grander scheme of things. They get a rep of flaking or being kicked, others won't deal with them or do they so with extreme caution. If I get someone I have not Rped with before but when I check their posting history and see they have Rped with another GM I know, I ask them - "Anything I need to know about this person?" - 9 times out of 10, they give me their "review" and that always weighs into my decision of it I let them in or not.

Bottom line - It's in the GM's hands and should remain there.

[The Harbinger of Ferocity]

There should be a system in place to mark against users who have this habit, with a case to be reviewed by Staff so not as to abuse the process, because otherwise there is no governing the unreliable sorts who drift aimlessly from topic to topic apparently searching for something they will never find, only to say, "Something in my life happened." when pressured about it. Consider me skeptical and cynical, but whenever I hear some new tragedy a player puts forth, there's that strong presence of doubt I feel resisting it. Now, mind you, I do not pressure them about it, but it does prove irritating.

Such a blacklisting system would only be visible to the topic's owner. The sort of, "This user has a negative rating for reliability." or "This user has a high negative rating for reliability." versus the, "This user has a normal rating for reliability." It isn't impolite or wrong to tell a Game Master that sort of information. If you, not saying that you are but in a hypothetical, were someone with a highly negative rating, it would and should be your duty to convince me as a Game Master you're worth inviting. You're unreliable and prone to disappearing in such a circumstance, so make your case why this is suddenly different and that you are not outright wasting my time or that of my other players.

If people cannot accept that as reality, that they are subject to review and should be and that not everyone should have to suffer for their lack of participation, that same which strongly negatively impacts others, then perhaps they shouldn't be on the Guild.

[Lady Absinthia]

What is considered "flaky" and what is not, is subjective. A system like that could be easily abused. If you join and RP and someone applies for it that you have had issues with in the past, just PM the Gm and let them know. If you are a GM it doesn't take long to look at a persons profile page and flip through their posts to see where they are posting and how often and which ones they suddenly stopped posting in.

[Dion]

I honestly see this having the same criticism that I gave the karma system.

Too easy to abuse, too hard to make objective.

[Hank]

This doesn't fix inactivity though, which is an issue for another time and the inactivity of the arena board is certainly something that needs to be addressed at some point, regardless of 'this inactivity being inherent' to arena.

@Buddha

I don't see why this "needs to be addressed" at all. The users who actually use the Arena have repeatedly stated the activity levels in that subforum are not a problem. Inactivity isn't inherently something that needs to be "fixed".

As for creating a system in which players can be flagged as unreliable or inactive... this isn't something that I've ever considered or talked about with the other staff before. I'm not sure it's a) feasible and b) desirable. I agree with @Buddha that it's prone to abuse.

That said, Overwatch recently added a 'report player' option for 'inactivity', so why shouldn't we?

Interesting thought.

[Lady Absinthia]

@Hank How would we go about adding a report people for inactivity if it were added? Would it be a GM thing or something more?

My worry is that it would be abused and that it is subjective. What I consider inactive or what another considers inactive will vary. I consider someone inactive if they have not posted in 1 of my Rp's in 7 days without word or request for an extension. Others might put that at 14 days, or 21. This changes even more drastically when it comes down to areas of the forum. In free if you don't post once a day you might be considered inactive. In NRP, I have seen people not post in a month but they aren't considered inactive.

So for example - I am hosting 6 RP's currently. I have 1 person that is in three of them but vanishes for a week - so I mark them as inactive for all three 3 RP's. Three negative markings. Then they go apply for an NRP, this GM only needs a post once a month but this person has 3 negative ratings, they decide not to let them join even though the ratings were given because of two different set of rules.

It gets to be a rather gray area.

Also, what if a GM just has a tussle with an RPer and kicks them? Technically they would be inactive then and have a negative rating. Don't get me wrong, maybe they deserve it, but then again it may have just been two personalities that didn't clash well. The person that was kicked might do great with another GM, just not that one.

It just leaves so much that could snow ball. Even if these ratings were patrolled by the Mods, say the ratings needs to be approved before it goes into affect - that is a lot of work for you all to handle.

Then there is another issue - who rates the GM's if they flake out?

Granted, this is all just mulling it over since it would take Mahz some major coding time to even get something like this set up but that's just my thoughts on the matter. I just see far too many issues arising because of it.

As always, just my two copper pieces.

[Dion]

@Hank perhaps it's not so much a problem as it is something that we can work on. For me, I'd like to see the arena become more active, even if I don't participate. Making the arena active is something that we should all be striving for here too, even if it's not inherently problematic. You'll agree that if arena got more activity, that'd be a good thing, right?

[The Harbinger of Ferocity]

A "report for inactivity" function, as I think it has been better worded, would need the Game Master to submit a reason for the flagging of that user and reference. Such as, posting in the original post the cycle expectdd from the member and that they failed to comply with it. Your average posting is seven days? Unchanged, the Game Master still has to initiate it. Your posting rate is once per day, as stated? Game Master still has to tag the user then add a comment as to why.

Could it be abused? Of course, any system can be in the right hands, but that is why it needs to be based on aggregate and a pattern of behavior, monitored by a specialized Staff member or one who believes they have good, neutral judgment - as they all should and we would hopefully expect.

Receive three notices? Are they in short from one another? How reliable is the Game Master's claim? All questions and beyond that need be asked and reviewed in each case.

The user becomes flagged, with the amount of confirmed - not pending or removed - offenses. It is still the Game Master's responsibility, to ensure they are willing to take the risk, and at that point if they do, no one is to blame but the host. The individual is held accountable. Otherwise, it is easy for them to just ignore contact.

This form of compliance is something you could not escape. You could reasonably challenge it, since you would know if you were labeled a deserter, but that burden falls on their shoulders.

Is this a system we are likely to see? No, I have no high hopes of that, but a mechanism or some sort of policing against this behavior should manifest. Every single roleplay I have been involved in here has died to inactivity, and only once have I ever bowed out of a game, by announcement to all members.

As an addition, a Game Master should not have to play detective to sort out who is or isn't a good fit for a topic by searching posting history.

Lastly, for complaints against a Game Master, a forwarded message from several users to report the instance to the Staff would suffice.

[Dion]

@The Harbinger of Ferocity Yes, GM's should have to do that. Moderators aren't responsible for your RP failing or succeeding. 'Don't leave RP's without saying' isn't part of the rules. I think that it's more reasonable to expect GM's to sort of take a look at who they're taking in. When I GM, which isn't often but frequent enough to say I have a good amount of experience, I take a look at potential recruits and ask around a bit in the already accepted members of the group if they know the person.

It doesn't take much time. Building and using a system to give people negative karma for flaking out is probably more time consuming.

If this ends up becoming a thing and I get negative marks, guess I'll just make new accounts.