|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:03 pm
Uxie's the cause but not directly involved with the group until near the end. Here is kind of a hint of what might happen to the group. Pokedex Entry Known as "The Being of Knowledge." It is said that it can wipe out the memory of those who see its eyes.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:30 pm
If you're including Uxie, may as well include the other two.
I absolutely HATE how Neko hasn't been using the Crew Forum for his ideas, if only as means to document the ideas. It makes for such easier...crew matter discussion, such as PLOT, ADMISSIONS, PLANS, and other things. It's also a good place to keep important things that may come up out of member's reach.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 9:02 pm
It would probably get more use if there was another moderator but when Mineshadow left I was the only one left. Three other members put me in a bit of a tight spot. If I promoted one then I would feel like I was playing favorites. Two would be excluding one person making them feel unwanted and if I promoted all three what would be the point of a crew only forum. I planned on doing a promotion or two with the test using it as a sort of fresh evaluation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 9:37 pm
Admins/Mods, in my opinion, keep activity up by encouraging activity themselves, and by being active in both the RP and the not RP. Due to the current size of the RP, only a few Mods/Admins/whatever would be needed.
And favoritism is OKAY, but not in an extreme detail. Selective favoritism is better. xD If the favoritism is EARNED I guess would be a better way to say that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:28 am
Ginji of Thunder Admins/Mods, in my opinion, keep activity up by encouraging activity themselves, and by being active in both the RP and the not RP. Due to the current size of the RP, only a few Mods/Admins/whatever would be needed. And favoritism is OKAY, but not in an extreme detail. Selective favoritism is better. xD If the favoritism is EARNED I guess would be a better way to say that. Favoritism is ok? O.o In the past with me Favoritism lost me a spot in a Rp cause the commanding guy had a 'fancy' for the person i was competeing with. That kind of favoritism isn't good no matter how you word it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 5:21 pm
In the sense you're talking about, it's not okay. sweatdrop
But in the part with favoritism being a method of selecting people to bounce ideas off of, it becomes almost essential that you like those people.
Scenario: You're partnered up with the biggest buttmunch to work on a project that is worth 90% of your grade. And there's no assignment to use as a template. Everything has to be done from scratch and there are rules that your don't know because he won't stop talking about cars and banging $20 whores. Both of you have to agree on the assignment, create it from scratch, collaborate, stay up late together, ect. Wouldn't you rather be partnered up with someone you like?
Yeah...it's exactly like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 6:17 pm
I honestly think before we do ANYTHING we need to re-rank everyone and remove people from the guild who aren't active.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 4:46 pm
Actually I was in the process of doing that. I'm using the exam to do the reranking evaluation. I'll be cleaning up the member list too. However Stars in a Shoebox has expressed that she would like herself and Kyoki_Hinote to still have access. The did an RP in the the past that went over 60 pages and the only record is in our archives. I'll possibly be talking further with her on the matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 6:22 pm
I would rather not ban people from the guild, just let them go inactive. If they choose to come back, that's their choice, but to close the door on them seems a bit harsh.
-Always watching ^_^-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 7:17 pm
Normally I would say the same but I would occasionally like to send group PM's and I wouldn't want to clutter the in-boxes of people who left. I'm thinking I might send them a PM asking them to reply if they would like to stay in the guild and then after a week removing them from the list. Would that be okay?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 7:59 pm
Ginji of Thunder I would rather not ban people from the guild, just let them go inactive. If they choose to come back, that's their choice, but to close the door on them seems a bit harsh. -Always watching ^_^- I meant removing them from the guild not banning them. They can always rejoin if they want. If you had a club and one member never came, you would toss them out wouldn't you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Removing=Banning.
It's the same button you press to get it to happen.
And who cares about there inbox's health? It's not spam if it has a purpose. -likes brute force methods-
I just really don't like removing people from the guild. It makes it easier if they do ever come back. Even if it's two years from now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 7:37 pm
i like how it is but i think we should have more RP oppretunities >.<
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
