|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 8:55 pm
A whole forum for chocolate frog cards??
I think not.
How about a thread, with one card per post.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:41 am
Well, that's what i want to say a thread not a forum, sorry when i post i just finish from my basketball training and i'm so tired, so my mind and my hand don't connect. sweatdrop sweatdrop sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 6:22 am
So when is the new sorting hat quiz going to be available? Or are we using the same one for now because from the calendar, sorting starts today and many elves are eager for some sorting-hat craziness. Or should we postpone it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 8:15 am
As of now since the schedule that was okay'd said to start sorting today, then we need to start sorting today.
@Angil: Whenever you get the test ready then you can edit that post. When you do please send all the moderators a copy of the key.
I'm posting a message now regarding sorting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 10:50 pm
In regards to any thoughts about bannings & inactive students (Inspired by the recent list update):
Okay, I'm putting my foot down for this finally. Anybody "misplaced" on my list (everybody who's been inactive for who knows how long) I think should be informed that we've seen they are inactive and that if they don't pick up their inactivity within a month they will be banned.
Concerning bannings, I think we should make it clear to people that if they get banned it isn't a permanent thing, cause its not like we're banning them from the guild for life, right? That way if they do become inactive for like a year and suddenly come back to life, they can re-join and not feel bad about getting banned. I don't think this idea is made clear to the people who are banned, and for the sake of preserving our status as a fun guild it should be let known. To do otherwise would subliminally send out a negative message. I mean really now, who thinks of banning as a good thing?
As for students, I believe that any who have been blatantly inactive for basically the entire term without giving any kind of warning should be held back (I don't want to demote them, because making them retake two years would just be cruel and considering that 1st years can't really be demoted...)
This is excepting anyone who showed some semblance of activity this term, some understanding guild protocol, and a respect for guild protocol (mentioning they'll be inactive in the student board). I think those students, in particular, remain inactive for another term, they should be banned, and should be notified of this before next term starts so that they know where their place is in this guild.
I thought about activity term-wise instead of month-wise cause I think it's just overall easier to think of inactivity this way when it comes to figuring out which students deserve to be moved up or not. I'd rather not demote students who actually bothered to follow our protocol when there are so many inactive members out there who haven't bothered to do as much.
What do you guys think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:45 am
I agree that making it clear that banning can be temporary is a good thing--but you should probably put something in there saying that a banned person who rejoins gets to go through the House Elf experience all over again. So banning isn't all bad, but it still carries a small motivation to avoid getting it.
That way a person banned once for inactivity will have to prove all over again that they can be active.
I'm thinking of sending out mass PM's to tell my students of the danger before them. They can voluntarily quit, try to put in a little more time in the next couple of months (not just one month for me. Those in school are having Finals this month, not to mention Christmas and all the business and family-visiting that comes with it, and then New Years, and then a whole new semester of school to get used to) post in the student message board not to expect them around for a while and why, or ignore the message, do nothing, and be summarily banned.
And I'm neither promoting nor demoting any students, including myself. The majority of the house was a little quiet this term, so quiet that I'm not sure who really was active in there. I also agree with Juni--how do you demote first years?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 11:03 am
I'll be promoting all my first years to make room for the new batch or sortees. Everyone else will be looked at with a case to case basis. Those that have been persistantly inactive will receive PMs notifying them that id they don't have time for the guild then they will be removed from it, and that they are welcome to reapply and go through the house elf process.
As for the sorting hat...working on it Hope to have it up soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 5:29 pm
I agree that we should make it clear that once banned, you can apply again. As Alutian and Juni brought up to send PMs to all those in danger, I have already done so and in general there has been a low amount of response. I'm going to try again for the sake of it all and put them in the temporarily inactive list until I get a response.
In my updated list I did not demote anybody. All of who I felt had not contributed enough by posting (but posted some during the three months before) were kept in their current year and those who were more active (from my observations) I promoted on to the next year. I also based it on the lack of post counts and Common Room visits each member had made and if no one stepped into the Common room or posted nothing at all, they were put in the inactive list.
I also mentioned that if any of them were unhappy with my decision, they could discuss it with me and work it out. So I had no problem promoting, demoting...whatever
All-in-all, I don't think there's a reason to demote anyone. You're not technically demoting someone if they're staying in their same year for another term, its more like a delay until we feel they're active enough to move on to the next level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2007 9:49 pm
Which brigns me to my next issue...If I don't hold myself back...I'll be Slytherin's second ever graduate....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 8:40 am
Hey! Congratulations!
So what's your plan as far as that's concerned? Hold yourself back with the rest of your house this term, or graduate?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 11:56 am
I'm giving the option to both Celestial Archer and Avatar34 if they want to stay back a year or not. I don't even know if they're the first Gryffindor graduates or not sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 8:52 am
On the bannings: The process won't just be an outright go to memberslist and ban them (in the interest of fairness we won't do that) Banning is a long process because it takes PMs and ultimatums. The first set would be one PM describing the situation and asking what they need, the next week
(I'll finsh this later)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:19 pm
Seems to me we've spent weeks discussing what to do and are just holding it off, all the while trying to be as nice and kind as possible to inactive members. It can be a much more simplistic process. Look at the list, delete anyone who hasn't posted since July, move on. In 6 months time, look at the list, anyone who hasn't posted since December, ban em, move on.
I seem to recall reading on the thingy you hafta read before you sign up that inactive members will be banned. If people are inactive, ban em. If they really want to come back, they will let us know and we can reinstate them. generally speaking, people who don't show up in 8 months, probably won't show up in 9. And if they do, then I'm sure they can understand that we find an 8 month absence to be inactive. Heck, could even add a paragraph on the sign up page saying "if you were a former member who has been banned due to inactivity, and wish to rejoin the guild, PM bladyblahblah."
If you wish to let certain members stick around despite absences, like former heads of house, or that old quidditch guy whose name I dunno, just don't ban em.
The problem with coddling every person who has ever joined is that by the time we've sent out the 2 or 3 warning pm's saying they'll be banned, and finally decided "okay, let's ban people" we've had 150 new people join and 125 of them need to be added to the "we need to send them 2 ultimatum pm's" list.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:25 pm
Also, a proposition:
Instead of having an SFQ thread here, why don't we have an SFQ forum subsection?
Half the stuff we discuss in here never gets resolved because we discuss it along with 6 other topics, and along the way 5 of them get left behind and forgotten. People also hafta search through 3 or 4 pages of posts just to find info relevant to any given topic. It's not very efficient.
Could make a new section, then if someone has an idea or we come across a problem, it can be addressed in it's own thread, i.e "The Inactivity thread," "The CFC thread," and "The Thoughts on Graduation Thread."
Then things wouldn't get lost and forgotten about. Also, once a discussion thread is resolved, you can put the decision in this thread or a similar thread that is stickied near the top, and lock the discussion so that it fades away into the abyss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:59 pm
Gah! gonk The new term is approaching in approx. 3 days! In that same day, the Hogwarts Express and the Christmas Event Starts! I don't think we've prepared enough to start a new term. I think I'm going revamp the Hogwarts Express that we have in the Around Hogwarts and set it for the Start of Term. Anyone out there panicking like I am? Maybe I'm too excited... rofl
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
