JULY ACTIVITY CHECK

[groundrules]

Heya! A couple of items this round, starting wiiiiiiith —

ACTIVITY CHECK

To pass activity requirements, you need to have produced one of: 1 network post or 5 log comments or 10 network/text-style comments in the month of check. Activity can be carried out in game communities or in character inboxes.

In June, insufficient activity was found for:

Lilah | alterare &dmash; swept as a result of two consecutive AC strikes
Okita Souji | deathcough — RECLAIMED
Su Xunxian | topoiran — RECLAIMED
Diego Hargreeves | gladiokinesis — RECLAIMED

Check in here by 23:59 on 5 July to reclaim a character, or if they have activity that may have been missed. You will be required to meet regular activity requirements this month, if you reclaim.

Don't hesitate to PM by the same deadline, if you have any extenuating circumstances you don't feel comfortable disclosing publicly.

ADMIN

■ UPDATED: the July calendar.

■ Activity is waived for July except for those who reclaimed in June. This is just for one month, because of some mod upheaval.

■ APPLICATIONS: our next applications cycle will take place between 24-30 July, on an invite-only basis. It will be the last one for some two months after, and we may need to see how comfortable we are with numbers and whether we want to implement any kind of caps after.

■ YE OLDE ENABLING: ahead of the app cycle, do you folks want an Enable Me / Characters I'd Love to See Meme? Chip in here.

■ SMALL REQUEST: it's been a bit more the case recently that characters obtain NPC or plot information, but don't get around to sharing it with the group ICly — in turn, this can create bottlenecks for those who are trying to uncover the mystery of the day. As usual, A+ if we can please try to post ICly about these items.

Also, if anyone has an idea for how characters can relay information more efficiently, we can brainstorm here.

Comments

Re: +1

[groundrules]

Thanks so much — we could include the tracking instructions for grandmas like me in a post note. I'm not sure about pinning it — I'll give that a think. But for sure we can tag it.

I think my only other lingering concern is: removing plot discussion from the network and centring it in just a compiled post could effectively heavily reduce IC network use and opportunities for characters to make new CR. But let's give things a go first and see where we land.

Re: +1

[rumorate]

I think if we follow Rizzy's lead and leave the option for responses to the compiled info to be IC, we can still allow for that. But I think for the smaller pieces of the puzzle - before it reaches something that warrants a network post - this could help get us to those network places faster.

But that's a valid concern and definitely something we could look out for on a test run.

+1

[inferus]

YES I'd still really love the option to just ICly thread off of like a little clue that someone found that they summarize oocly even if they link to another post/thread about it.

I hate making too many network posts myself and would be more likely to comment to a bigger post. It just streamlines the whole information sharing process, but still allows for IC interactions etc even on small clues.

[groundrules]

Yepyep, I see where you're going with this — assuming no other solution we like better emerges, we can give this a go on the 8th.

And I can try to flag where information qualifies as big and where the ask would be to make an individual post. That can be framed as a pre-condition of signing up for certain quests or NPC threads, where applicable, so people aren't blindsided by the request, and it doesn't unexpectedly take a toll on their personal availability.