Jump to content

Activity Check Cheaters


Anonymous
 Share

Recommended Posts

I was wondering how people deal with members that come in just for the check, post the minimum to pass it and they go back off into the sunset? I've gotten a complaint about this due to the members in question holding very popular canons.

Anonymous poster hash: ca7a5...4f3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anonymous said:

I was wondering how people deal with members that come in just for the check, post the minimum to pass it and they go back off into the sunset? I've gotten a complaint about this due to the members in question holding very popular canons.

Anonymous poster hash: ca7a5...4f3

This is why I advocate passive checks, where the admin team silently checks user activity instead of asking players to post in a special thread to pass the check. If those sorts of users aren't loudly reminded and given a target time frame to post and magically keep their characters/positions/whatever, they tend to fail AC. Depending on your system, these sorts of checks can make more work for admins, but if you have a user base where that's a common problem, it may be worth hiring someone to do it, or take on another task so that a more senior admin has time to dedicate to it.

  • I read this! 4
  • Agree 3

Emperor468x60.png.b7bb87f952ee0dcc7a97150c6258c8f9.png

Captain Amelia Waterhouse, Commanding Officer

=/\= Join =/\= Roster & Openings =/\= Rules =/\= Chat =/\=

"It is human nature to yearn to be what we were never intended for. It is singular, but it is so." -Mark Twain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why I don't do activity checks. I only deal with your inactivity when it's inconveniencing others.

  • I read this! 2

UNMASQUED

Vampires are real. Now the world knows about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Operations Mod

I've got to say that I agree with Death Kitten on this count. 

 

Doing active activity checks makes it too easy for members to weasel around the requirement. I was on a site where several members had upwards of 15 characters, the majority of which were only ever posted with when a check arose. So it turned into two weeks of "I need threads for x and y!" and then all the sudden the site gets flooded with threads that get posted in for maybe 2-3 rounds and then never get finished - which just leads to a lot of board clean up for the staff on down the road. 

 

My site only requires a post a month for general characters to be considered active (which personally I think is being a little to generous). Ranked characters have to post at least once every two weeks.

 

So I get into the user management part of my admin panel every two months or so, set it to search out any characters that haven't been posted in the last 60 days, and just delete them all in one fell sweep. Every now and then I might make an announcement to give my members about a 48 hour warning about it, but usually not. 

 

Personally, it has been my experience that these passive checks cause members to take activity requirements seriously, where active checks make them lazy about keeping up. Besides, what's the point in making the rule if you're not going to enforce it? 

  • I read this! 2
  • Agree 1

 

bannerlong.png

0_mainsignature (1).jpg

rpgida.png

Icon & Profile set by The Inquisitor of Dragon Age: Absolution

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps it would be wise to discuss why people appear just for the activity checks. Understanding the reason behind why people do things helps us figure out better ways to get these behaviors resolved.

 

For me as a member, I see activity checks as somewhat threatening. I have chosen to be a part of this community but for one reason or another, I'm unable to post at this time. When the activity check comes around and I see the word "delete" get thrown around, I realize that in order to stay a part of this community, I need to post in the check. Otherwise my hard work, my character building, my characters' relationships and impact on others will all get erased as though it all never existed. Moreover, the fact that I was a member of the community will be erased, as though no one cares about my presence. It's even more concerning when I've been a member for awhile. Suddenly stats and member numbers are more important than me.

 

That said, activity and a presence are reasonable things to expect from members of any club or group or team. So the fact that a certain level of activity is required doesn't bother me in and of itself. My concern is more with the fact that numbers are more important than any individual person and the work that person has put into the community. For this reason, I will respond to an activity check even if I'm not active so that I can preserve my place in the community.

 

Other people might have other reasons for replying to activity checks even if they're not active. Maybe they're guilty that they took on an obligation that they haven't been able to keep up with, maybe they think that this time they'll be active, maybe they just don't care about their activity and are entitled. Regardless, knowing a reason why will help figure out how to address this issue.

 

For me, my solution is to not have regular activity checks. As @Death Kitten said, if you loudly remind people, you'll get the ones who post but who aren't active. I plan on going through and deleting inactive claims and archiving profiles as needed.

 

But because I understand that the reason for clinging to inactive characters are deeper than just being active or not, I have also put some things in place so that people don't feel like they HAVE to be active if they aren't able. I have written in the plot that inactivity of a character may be related back to the plot as staff decides. This allows us to wrap up loose ends and allows the member to resume the characters if and when they return. I don't require every character to be active all the time. And, probably most importantly, I expect members to self regulate. They can be a part of the community and post as they can, but they can't expect to have 12 characters, ditch every few weeks, and leave other people's plots hanging. Members take on as much or as little as they desire as long as it's realistic and attainable for their schedules.

 

Finally, I don't delete people. Once a part of our community, always a part of the community. As time passes, people may not remember you, but you still have your place in history.

  • I read this! 4
  • Agree 1
  • Love 1

WoL___dark01.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Behind the scenes activity checks' is my advice to you on this one. Canons would usually have a requirement and so possibly would your rules.

Make a time frame you are comfortable with, e.g. 30 days, and after this, they are on the 'watch list'. Then decide how much more of a grace period you will allow until you actually make them inactive and reopen all their claims.  My site only runs the "post to the AC" kind of checks about twice a year, and it is more for those to decide if they wish to archive any characters they don't want to play anymore, check all their mini-profiles are filled out properly etc.

  • I read this! 3

5a691fb4de413_advertisingbanner_rpginitiativeTS.png.699678f5663abf3c750d133673768a18.png

Plot | Rules | Canons | Wanted | Advertising

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like I need to follow up more. I agree when @Uaithne advocates for not deleting people, and trying to understand why they're not meeting activity levels, and this is especially important when usuing passive checks because it doesn't allow people to advocate for themselves if they just didn't realize they'd fallen behind. Because my game is so small, I usually know exactly why people are failing the activity check according to the system because I'm usually chatting with my players — I know who's trying to participate and are stuck because of the game-wide plot and/or writing partner, who's fighting a low swing in their health, or other such things — and I check in when I don't know what's going on with someone, as well as write around people as much as I can.

 

The system I use for my game defaults to archiving accounts and characters, though I have played on games where the staff delete people when a player leaves. I prefer to archive instead, if for no reason but to keep the history of the game in tact for anyone who wants to read it later or when our plot circles back around to reference old adventures.

  • I read this! 4
  • Agree 1

Emperor468x60.png.b7bb87f952ee0dcc7a97150c6258c8f9.png

Captain Amelia Waterhouse, Commanding Officer

=/\= Join =/\= Roster & Openings =/\= Rules =/\= Chat =/\=

"It is human nature to yearn to be what we were never intended for. It is singular, but it is so." -Mark Twain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One issue I had with a board I was on was that although there was an activity check, the admin hadn't posted anything IC on their canon or ocs for months, but introduced activity checks for canons as a way to get people to post. I probably wouldn't have minded it if the activity check for canons had been there before I joined it, or if the admin (and other staff members) made IC themselves, but they hardly ever posted IC in all the time I was on the board and seemed to hold on to canon characters because they were staff. I was in a position where I didn't know if I should start threads for them or make open threads as I didn't know if they would get a response. I think it's important that staff and admin follow the rules they make for a site about activity and not use their positions to keep hold of characters.

Anonymous poster hash: 5aa8c...80b

  • I read this! 1
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My board doesn't have canons, but we do have ranks.

 

We have a post requirement for every ranked character. If you don't make it, you lose the rank. If you miss an AC, you lose the rank. If you show up just for the AC, but we notice you haven't been around, we talk to you about it and figure out what's going on. We'll frequently let this slide for one AC (we do them every 2 months) and then if the same situation happens next time, you'll probably lose your rank. 

 

Another thing we do is establish that to get a rank, you have to be active for X amount of time. That way we don't get people coming in and just trying to claim every rank they can. We also require an application for ranks, but that's redundant for canons. Maybe make it so canons can only be obtained after a set period of time and without X amount of posts between ACs they are taken back?

 

You could always approach the members and point it out. "Hey, we notice you only pop in for ACs and don't seem to be doing much with Important Canon Character. We'd like to see that character more active. Is there something going on keeping you from doing so?" Or let them know that if they don't pick up the pace, you'll be taking the canon back so someone more active/interested can claim it.

 

It's never a fun position to be in, trying to decide who goes/who stays based on stuff like this. Good luck handling it.

  • I read this! 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My recommendation is also a passive check. As for dealing with Canons, you could add a rule that simply warns "If a canon character is found to be inactive (xyz limit if you choose to set one), staff reserves the right to allow another member to apply for that canon". This way, you gain the option of letting that inactive character "sit" up until the point that somebody comes around asking if the position is open. If you get a complaint from the original Canon "owner", you can merely say "Well you haven't posted with xy character in 6 months. Sorry, but in order to keep canons you have to actually USE them. Its stated clearly in the rules"

Edited by CovertSphinx
  • I read this! 3

 

OnyxSiggy1.jpg.c76f2c1acc64a865bdf5164f4c085020.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not doing AC checks myself. Granted we are small and newly opened, but I don't plan to do them down the road. We don't have canons but we do have adoptable characters. The reason? Yes we love to see activity but not everyone posts an LoA or says why they can't be active. Some people are private like that. Having to worry that your hard work is going to be deleted is unneeded pressure on someone. The only time that is really a problem is if someone hasn't been active in a while and another writer wants to use the face claim. Then I would reach out to the inactive and if, if I didn't hear anything back archive the character and free the face claim

 

As it's been said before, people will pop up to seem active and then disappear again. We all have a multitude of reasons why we can't post from time to time. From writer's block to what have you, but the one thing I won't stand for is being inactive on the forum and constantly chatting away in Discord/Cbox/etc. Especially when they have threads leaving people hanging. I will reach out to them and say that isn't cool or find out why this is. People are people. We can't always tell what a person is going to do or why they do what they do. It's just a matter of it is what it is. Do the best you can and find what works for you.

spacer.pngDecadence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds like so many of us are in agreement here! 

 

We don't do activity checks at Sirocco, but I do have Ranked Characters that have a 3 month activity requirement. This means a post in a IC thread, not a log-in. After 3 months I reach out to the player with the ranked character (if I know they haven't just left). The characters then get NPCed and the position opens back up for other players and their characters to move into, though you cannot claim anyone else's character. If the position never gets filled and the original player comes back and their NPC is still in that position, I usually allow that person to have their character & rank back with little fuss. (Obviously nobody else wanted it sooo, nbd).

 

For non-ranked characters I archive character profiles after 4+ months (some months I'm more diligent than others), but don't bother with accounts unless the person has explicitly asked me to upon their departure. Anyone that's ever created an account with me can come back at any time and I can unarchive their non-ranked characters and they can play as if they've never left.

 

NOTE: I do not allow players that have gone inactive for a 4+ months to retrieve their ranked characters (In Pern that's usually Golds & Bronzes and sometimes Browns). These are highly coveted dragons & positions and most people on our site have to acquire them by high activity levels or through in-character means. For those that have explicitly asked to regain them, I have allowed a trial basis meaning "If you return for a month or two and post consistently I shall reconsider returning your ranked characters to you", but only if the character is highly coveted & not ranked, though nobody to date has stuck around long enough to be given back their major characters. It is unfortunate that once someone falls inactive they'll likely do it again.

 

I should also mention that we get what I like to call drifters. These are people that come and play for a few weeks every few months. Once I get the hang of who does this, I stop archiving their characters after 4 months because I know as soon as I do, they'll be back. It saves me the trouble of archiving and unarchiving, so there are a few players that are the exception to my inactivity rule, but because archiving is not a permanent thing most characters, I don't feel like I'm being unfair to anyone as the process is entirely reversible for most.

 

TL:DR: Having people log in just to post (I'm still here) is not the same as someone participating in an actual thread. You just need to figure out what is easiest FOR YOU and most fair to your other players. For me, taking the easy approach toward everything that isn't a Ranked Character works best. We like to play with everyone, even if it is just once or twice a year when they stop by, but we also like highly active important characters so our balance is on something that is easy for players and that I can totally enforce. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to play the devil's advocate...

 

From an admin perspective, I think behind-the-scenes checks make a lot of sense. It weeds out people who are not posting regularly or need a shove to post. I've seen dozens of activity checks where someone squeaks by every month with the minimum level of activity -- and as an admin that's frustrating.

 

As a member, though, I despise behind the scene activity checks and punishments for lack of activity (but meeting posting requirements). I think that the staff and community needs to be honest with itself. If you are okay with someone posting once a month -- that's your AC. That's saying "if you post with Captain America on my Marvel site 1 time every four weeks, we're good with that." I think it's kind of confusing to say "We require 1 post per month, but you're going to get in trouble if you only post once per month." To me that makes no sense.

 

If the frustration is that there is an AC once a month (let's say you have to do 2 posts per month), then maybe instead of making it 2 posts per month, it's 1 post every two weeks. It makes it so that they keep the same expected level of activity but they are actually required to be more active on the site.  (I do the same as a few people above mentioned... where I basically mark "Important/Ranked" characters, and they have to post more than "normal" characters. -- so basically it avoids the "you have a coveted character, but you're never posting" problem.)

  • I read this! 1
tumblr_ovxhy4cZLY1wtsmmno3_r1_100.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Thyme for me "silent checks" are just checking if you have posted the minimum required by the rules, without posting a roll call where you must say you're there and it doesn't add anything to RP.

 

That said, if you're inactive I don't delete you straight away, I poke and see if you're around or not.

 

I agree on honest expectations. It's better to have stricter rules although with some flexibility ("post every week, but you can tell us when you're inactive") than overly tolerant just to get frustrated.

 

You can't run a board if posting once a month is the norm, so I wouldn't put it in the rules.

  • I read this! 2

UNMASQUED

Vampires are real. Now the world knows about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always thought the passive check was more about realizing someone hasn't posted in awhile and archiving their stuff. Rather than a formal activity held once every [time period] in which one counts posts of each character.

  • I read this! 2
  • Agree 1

WoL___dark01.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Guidelines and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.