Proposal

[ddrdanc3r55]

Re: Proposal

http://www.bemanistyle.com/forum/showthread.php?t=367&page=2

Play there. We need players, and BMS is less advanced. Of course, that's only if you want to.

[Tps222]

Re: Proposal

Sounds like a good idea to me, people will be more apt to signup if they fear they won't be able to get in.

The main problem is that this game has gone on for a long time, and people eventually get uninterested in it. I know that I do not posess the same attitude towards the game that I had last year. 33 games is a lot.

[flypie743]

Re: Proposal

Man...TWG...it's been a while.

[Tasselfoot]

Re: Proposal

I am Tass, and I do NOT approve of this thread.

PS - I will do my best to make signups... midnight & 6am here.

PPS - TWC better be able to veto certain jTWGers... those fine folks who were not let into TWG before there was a jTWG. You guys know who you are.

[evilbutterfly]

Re: Proposal

I'm still waiting for CCG2...or 3? Whichever it is.

<3 infiltration

=(

[Lightknight924]

Re: Proposal

Does this mean I'm allowed into TWG when Tps is not playing?

Edit* I just read Tass's post and....

[StoicRoivaS]

Re: Proposal

No offense to anyone at all, but observing the current TWG will hopefully lead you all to the same obvious conclusion that I came to immediately when first considering this idea:

1) The players that don't care as much about the game are still going to sign up. This is entirely unavoidable.

2) Merging jTWG and TWG will not correct a lack of people joining the two divisions, as there was no problem to begin with. Just because a game doesn't fill up within the hour the thread was unlocked does not mean people aren't interested. People do have lives outside of FFR.

3) The actual problem, as I stated earlier, is not a lack of participants, but the lack of enthusiasm and attention people give the game once they secure their spot to play in. Once they are confirmed to be playing in a game, there is zero reason to make an effort other than the sole enjoyment they receive from playing the game. Hence, if someone isn't that interested, or got a role they did not desire, there's a fair chance they'll put very little into the game once it's starts.

I know that I pretty much don't know anything about FFR to begin with, but that's hardly what's under question. It bothers me to know that even among your "Critical Thinkers" no one but Tass and I possessed enough foresight to see this exact thing happening over a week before it did. At least I'm assuming Tass was serious when he did not approve of the thread, but either way. I don't really know, or care for that matter, if my new voice can sway much, but I know if I were running things, I would listen to intelligent people before I would listen to experienced people. One of those things I am, and the other I am obviously not. Make your own choices, but for the people who really want to play jTWG/TWG, at least consider an activity quota or similar solution over merging the two divisions, an obviously horrible idea. Again, no hard feelings. That is all. Take care.

Edit: Grammatical Clarity

[JurseyRider734]

Re: Proposal

Well if you reserved all the spots for people who were going to participate a lot and be really enthusiastic about it, it wouldn't fill up. I agree that some people like minineo/ddrdancer shouldn't be playing because every game they do jack ****. I am not the most active person myself, but at least I usually put my vote in and sometimes post my feelings on the situation. I will respond on AIM if you ask me about it usually. Iggy did the other day and he got pretty good explainations out of me (i lost the convo. I kept the window open but my computer restarted overnight and it was gone so yeah i hope you saved that, iggy). No one really bothers to IM me about it so i'm just like okay.

So yeah I agree with what you're saying but...I don't think what you want to happen will happen.

[Tps222]

Re: Proposal

I'm usually one of the more active and enthuastic players in the game, but over the last few my interest in TWG has declined. I'm going to have to agree with Stoic on this one, a post quota does need to be added.

[StoicRoivaS]

Re: Proposal

I don't mean to say I have the answer, as I obviously don't. I'm not entirely sure how well a post quota would work either. It would obviously have to be handled personally by the host and or TWC, because some posts can contain very much in very few words and the opposite is obviously true. So a mere count wouldn't suffice at all, but with the host's close attention, inactive players could be easily noticed and dealt with. I understand that I TWC starts handing out one game bans that both games may not fill up right away, but if people start seeing one game bans being handed out, they'll either start to participate or hopefully quit signing up. In the event that interest is lost because of the bans, then merging the two divisions is a great idea, but as it stands now, I'm merely trying to point out that merging the two was a horrible idea. Consequently, because of my mother's divorce and moving 3 times in under 5 months, I was unable to make it back into the signups for my brother's game after the two divisions were merged. Not that I'm complaining or anything, just pointing out that if people would have taken my advice to begin with, you would have had at least one more player who is both very interested and would be very active (Note: Me, for the slow). Again, this obviously isn't my call, but I'm willing to help in any manner I can, even if that means being the voice of dissent for a while in lieu of other people's horrible ideas, no offense. Peace.

[nforcer06164]

Re: Proposal

We're always ready to let new players in that are willing to be active and play smart. I think Wilkin got in from post one due to Guido's recommendation (correct me if I'm wrong, anybody), and he was not an inactive or poor player by any means. Anybody that has the mental capacity to think a bit out side the box, come up with different ideas, stay active, etc. are well-suited for the game.

I agree with Jurs that some players like minineo and randumb shouldn't be playing, or need to reexamine their own playing styles, because they really don't play. I think that, after this game, the TWC needs to take a long, hard look at recent players and their activity, and decide if they are qualified to continue playing.

A post quota, I think, is not a good idea. Though most of the players that are a bit more dedicated, like me, iggy, tass, afrobean, and others try to make a good amount of substance posts every game day, there are some things that occur in real life that are unavoidable. Let me provide an example. About a year or two ago, from a combination of heavy rains, frozen ground, and a cracked foundation, my basement flooded and we had to move everything away from one wall. That meant that the computer had to be disconnected so the carpet and padding underneath could be pulled up so certain things could be dried or thrown away, so new stuff could be put in when the foundation was repaired. I lost internet access for a few days, just around signing up for a TWG. You see, certain things are out of our control, and we shouldn't be punished simply because some sort of unexpected complication arises. Some of us have ways to contact other FFR members by phone, and are responsible enough to find a way to alert others when a situation arises.

There are some certain anomalies that make the quota plan ineffective, in a sense, for what it is trying to accomplish. Making a post quota may get people to post, but nornmally inactive people will probably just spew garbage posts just to meet it. I think bans are a good wake-up call, but people that repeatedly stay unacceptably inactive after a warning or ban may need to be barred from games for an extended period of time, or simply removed from the usergroup. At least, that's my take on the whole thing.

[ddrdanc3r55]

Re: Proposal

Well if you reserved all the spots for people who were going to participate a lot and be really enthusiastic about it, it wouldn't fill up. I agree that some people like minineo/ddrdancer shouldn't be playing because every game they do jack ****. I am not the most active person myself, but at least I usually put my vote in and sometimes post my feelings on the situation. I will respond on AIM if you ask me about it usually. Iggy did the other day and he got pretty good explainations out of me (i lost the convo. I kept the window open but my computer restarted overnight and it was gone so yeah i hope you saved that, iggy). No one really bothers to IM me about it so i'm just like okay.

So yeah I agree with what you're saying but...I don't think what you want to happen will happen.

Okay, whatever. I don't contribute much, but that doesn't mean you have to compare me with minineo. I'm far more active/valuable than him.

[StoicRoivaS]

Re: Proposal

I completely agree, like I said earlier, a post quota is probably about the worst way to go. A simple count of the number of posts by a person is a horrible thing to base activity off of, which is why I suggested that it be personally observed by the host of the game and or TWC. I guess since I'm the one most concerned with this, I should be the one to at least suggest a solution. During the post game of any jTWG/TWG game, the host should be required to look back through each game day and make sure that each player has an average of one worth while post each day. Granted we can't always make it to our computers each game day, but I think an average of one per game day is more than fair. If you miss a day or know you'll be gone for the majority of a game day, then it would be acceptable to make two quality posts the following game day to make up for the previous. A game day is, what, typically 2 real days or more? I think asking one quality post of the TWGers each 48 hours is more than fair. If you cannot make it to a computer once in 48 hours you probably shouldn't have signed up in the first place. Whenst referring to a "quality" post I mean exactly that. A post that is thoughtful or important to the overall course of the game would be then considered "quality" at the host's discretion. A post with a vote and two sentences of justification is not considered a quality post in my opinion, as it's often a wolf's job to make a couple unjustified remarks along with their vote and these are often thought up on the spot to merely sound human. Again this would be all up to the host to decide what is "quality" and what is not. At the start of the post game, along with revealing roles etc. the host would list the names of any players that are under question for a lack of activity on the visible game thread. At this point any player that wishes to vouch for the accused’s lack of activity may do so. If some predetermined number or percentage of players vouch for a players activity, that player is then excused from any penalties. This handles a number of situations that can arise. Primarily, it may be in some player’s strategies to post very little on the visible thread, for various reasons. They may be extremely active behind the scenes with their fellow players. If this is the case, then other players would be able to agree to the accused’s activity off of the thread. I know that many times most of a game is played out through AIM, chat rooms, PMs, etc, and this is perfectly acceptable. If a player feels the accused made a significant effort through one of these methods, then can vouch for them and there is no harm done. Secondly, if there are some extenuating circumstances that keep a player from maintaining an adequate level of activity, that player could then do their best to alert a number of other players to their situation. These players could then come forward as notified and the accused would then be excused. Granted, this is an easy escape for people to avoid bans, so if it is found that any player is falsifying personal events, or over-using this device, they can be dealt with accordingly. Obviously is someone's mother dies two games in a row, something is up. If a player in question does not have a sufficient number of players vouch for their activity, say, one third or one fourth, then they are dealt with however TWC deems fit. I would personally agree with a 2 game ban if not more. Maybe I'm being idealistic, but five quality posts over the course of a 5 day game and not having your grandma die twice in a row is not all that much to ask of people who are willing participants in TWG. This will obviously add a bit of complexity to the entire process, but it is something I would be willing to do, and hopefully the hosts would be as well, in order to keep the games open for the players who are actually going to play the game. As I mentioned earlier, if this significantly cuts down the number of people playing, then one division would be perfect. I personally wouldn't mind playing large games with 16 or so dedicated players each and every game. Hopefully, though, the idea is that people will start being more active and inspire each other to put more thought into the game. If enough people are inspired to play at an acceptable level of activity, then both divisions could be open again. Those are my thoughts. Do with them what you please. I'm merely trying to help. Take care.

[nforcer06164]

Re: Proposal

While I'm not sure I agree entirely with your methods, I think you've got a pretty good idea there. My main concern in doing something like this is the kind of effect it might have on the game itself.

[iggymatrixcounter]

Re: Proposal

IMO people don't post as a strategy. They are a key role and do not want suspicion on themselves.

Therefore I don't think any rule beyond getting two phantoms should effect any given player. I think people just vote for the niggest posters and the inactives KNOW that they can get away with it and therefore they don't post. If during gameplay more people were lynched because they were inactive, that may push others to post more.