Be aware!: temporary 4-day inactivation limit coming up

[hts]

I feel that 4 days is more appropriate. In my nation right now there is a party that stops in every 5 days or so and avoids deactivation. He continues to win some seats but contributes very little. He will be very active for 2 days, and then not come on for another 5 days.

This is annoying and I think that if you are not coming on at least once in 4 days then you are inactive, and that your party should be inactivated. That is just my opinion, but I hope that more players, and moderation, agree so that 4 days will become the standard.

[Maxington]

Hts, you do know that some people here have personal issues. And personal lives?
I understand that you are getting mad with him not contributing much to the roleplay but having him be deactivated if he was not active for the 4 days is crazy. In real life many people you see here have things going on in their lives. For instance PaleRider.
If what you have suggested here is enforced people like PaleRider and other roleplayers will see that their party will be deactivited due to those roleplayers dealing with personal issues or whatever it may be.

[Kubrick]

If you're too busy to play Particracy, don't play Particracy. Come back when you have time. I'm really busy yet I manage to log in at least twice a day to check the bills and vote, discuss or do things. I even have time for the forum RP.

[Siggon Kristov]

Hts, you do know that some people here have personal issues. And personal lives?

One player's personal issues should not result in constant inconvenience for other players.

I understand that you are getting mad with him not contributing much to the roleplay but having him be deactivated if he was not active for the 4 days is crazy.

4 days is not crazy. 4 days is 2 years in-game. Each bill cycle (the time it takes for voting on a bill to be processed) is 8 months. 4 days in real life is enough time for 3 separate bill cycles to occur consecutively. It's also the lower limit for term lengths in this game; elections can be 4 real-life days apart in this game.

Do you know how frustrating it is when you try to pass a cabinet proposal or treaty ratification, and you wait almost 2 days, only to see that a party messed the whole thing up by abstaining? This can happen 2-3 times in a row within 3 days.

In real life many people you see here have things going on in their lives. For instance PaleRider.
If what you have suggested here is enforced people like PaleRider and other roleplayers will see that their party will be deactivited due to those roleplayers dealing with personal issues or whatever it may be.

It's funny that you mention PaleRider, when he supports changing the inactivity limit as well.

[Aquinas]

Maxington is right in the sense that being inactivated for not logging in should not be seen as a "punishment" or personal admonishment. It is simply the procedure we have for keeping each nation reasonably lively and playable. There are all kinds of reasons why a player might not be able to log on. In fact, I think most of us on the forum (including myself) have had a party inactivated for not logging in at some point or other.

If players know they are not going to be able to log in for a while, they are (and always have been) encouraged to inactivate using the option on their User Page. If they can minimise disruption to the flow of the game by doing that just before an election rather than just after an election, all the better. Doing this is usually appreciated by other players in the nation. It also has the advantage, of course, that the player's party will not lose Visibility whilst he is inactive. And as soon as he wants to rejoin the game again, he can do so by requesting reactivation. From a Moderation point of view, we never hold anybody at fault for being inactivated for not logging in, inactivating themselves or requesting reactivation.

[MichaelReilly]

I'm with Maxington on this. There does seem to be a weird clique of players on here who don't seem to have a life outside of this game.

4 days away means they should be deactivated?!? Laughable.

Shots fired.

[Siggon Kristov]

I'm with Maxington on this. There does seem to be a weird clique of players on here who don't seem to have a life outside of this game.

Unless a player is writing a elaborate news articles in the forum everyday, this game does not take much.
We're not saying that players should debate and/or RP everyday. All they really need to do is vote on bills.

4 days away means they should be deactivated?!? Laughable.

It's not like they can't be reactivated after that.

[Amazeroth]

I'm with Maxington on this. There does seem to be a weird clique of players on here who don't seem to have a life outside of this game.

Unless a player is writing a elaborate news articles in the forum everyday, this game does not take much.
We're not saying that players should debate and/or RP everyday. All they really need to do is vote on bills.

Actually, even looking in every 4 days would be enough to not get deactivated. And as long as personal life doesn't involve going on long trips without internet access regularly, or longer-than-4-days shifts, or something, this shouldn't be so hard to do.

And for the other cases - sickness, vacations, etc. - that's exactly what deactivation (and of course eve more - self-deactivation) is there for. It's not a punishment for not committing enough, it's a way to keep the game playable for the other players.

[Siggon Kristov]

I'm with Maxington on this. There does seem to be a weird clique of players on here who don't seem to have a life outside of this game.

Unless a player is writing a elaborate news articles in the forum everyday, this game does not take much.
We're not saying that players should debate and/or RP everyday. All they really need to do is vote on bills.

Actually, even looking in every 4 days would be enough to not get deactivated. And as long as personal life doesn't involve going on long trips without internet access regularly, or longer-than-4-days shifts, or something, this shouldn't be so hard to do.

Exactly. I don't see the point of someone playing the game if they're only going to login once every 5-6 days. They're not really playing. Once every 4 days isn't so bad.

And for the other cases - sickness, vacations, etc. - that's exactly what deactivation (and of course eve more - self-deactivation) is there for. It's not a punishment for not committing enough, it's a way to keep the game playable for the other players.

Thank you.

--

Now I recall your primary problem with a 4-day inactivity limit was that you couldn't be bothered to put in the extra work that is required to enforce it. Aquinas, however, said that he doesn't have much of a problem with putting out that effort:

From my own perspective I can report that going through the list of users and inactivating the ones that hadn't logged in for 4 days was just a small chore, little more than clicking a few buttons. It was never necessary to inactivate more than a few users each day. So continuing with a 4 day rule would, so far as I can see, not place an undue burden on me.

Could we have a global 4-day limit?

[hts]

Thanks Siggon, Amazeroth, and Kubrick for arguing my point. I am not asking him to play for hours everyday, just to stop in once every few days to vote at least. That takes 5 minutes. I do not care how busy you are, everyone has at least 5 minutes to check before you they go to sleep at night. I do a lot of things and I just take a one or two minute break from doing things to check in on particracy.

I have a life, but I just schedule in some particracy time. There is no excuse for not playing at all for four days, unless you have a serious RL situation, like an illness. I do not think anyone would get mad about that.

But playing every 5 days is just unacceptable, and should not be tolerated. It disrupts everything.