A NEW RULE APPEARS

[these_balls]

Hey, Route!

Yes, more new stuff. Everything chaaanges, chaaaanges, it's evolutionary~

1) New apps rule!:
In the interest of clarity and app processing speed, we now ask that potential applicants post their application in comments rather than linking. If the app contains explicit references to 'hard' spoilers (think big reveals, like 'Dumbledore dies', I SEE DEAD PEOPLE, I am your father etc), players should put the application in their own journal or their character's journal and link it, making sure to mention the presence of spoilers within.

We've always gotten linked apps (goodness knows I'm guilty of linking an app or five that was spoiler-free!), but having them all on the page means the mods don't have to open a million tabs while processing, and spoiler links keep fellow players from stumbling onto things that might ruin a canon for them.

This is a rule; as of today (the 11th of October), if your app is linked but not marked for spoilers, it will not be processed that week. We trust all our players will read and abide by the rules list, which has not changed besides this.

2) Polling about the passwords:
RELAX, we're not changing anything concerning passwords...yet. But we're thinking it's about time this thing got an overhaul, don't you think?

Our proposed fix: What we'd like to do is remove the passwords altogether and replace them with something of a task system: on the rules and FAQ pages, tasks such as 'explain in one sentence how your character feels about strawberries in their personality section' or 'include a link to your favorite youtube video in the canon links section'.

The goal here is to make sure people have at least given a cursory visit to both pages. These tasks would change arbitrarily and be located arbitrarily within the FAQ and rules. Yes, these would be more work for you, and for us, but the current password system feels outdated and obvious.

Your turn: How do you feel, Route? Hate this idea? Love passwords? Have a better idea? Let us know!

[Poll #1785767]


If you have grievances, comments, suggestions or ideas concerning either the new app rule or the password system, you can: PM the mod account, PM any of us individually, catch us on AIM, or post (anonymously or not) to our (screened) Suggestions post.

Looking forward to hear from you!

Comments

i have to stop editing.

[phoenix-temple.livejournal.com]

Oh my god, do I ever stop asking questions.

On linking applications, I know comments were getting screened a lot around the time linking got super popular. I just wanted to make sure that this wouldn't happen again? It's the whole IF IT'S NOT A WHITE LISTED LINK, SCREW YOU 8DDD thing LJ started doing last spring. I think, for a while at least, wikia wasn't whitelisted and that's where a good portion of reference links come from.

Also, on passwords: I know you've heard this a thousand times from me, but if someone is already in the game, reading through the huge post that is the FAQ is a giant headache to find something that hasn't even necessarily changed. I don't think a system like that is going to work when you have fifteen and a half pages (on google docs) that a player is going to have to read through every single time they want to apply for a character.

I'm all for an arbitrary task being placed arbitrarily in the FAQ, but I think the arbitrary changes are a little unnecessary. The FAQ might change but unless you're going to overhaul it completely, it's overkill to ask someone to read fifteen pages that are mostly static to find a task.

Mind you when I mention this, I think of the Dollsy House, where there was a task stated in the rules, that never changed to my knowledge, but you'd have to read the FAQ to know.

Alternatively, I also think Mostly Harmless's system works pretty well? Where you have to answer a question with information from the FAQ. This actually seems like a pretty popular system, when it comes to making sure people read the FAQ.

Though I'd like to see the youtube thing, personally. It sounds fun.

[these_balls]

never stop asking question! i'll do my best.

If we have a linking problem (like, as you pointed out, comments getting screened) rescinding the rule may definitely become an option; but for now, we want to try this out in the name of making apps both A) easier and faster for us to get through, and B) keeping everything in place for our and for players' reference. We had some concerns, for instance, when someone erroneously thought we'd accepted a (linked) app with no samples, when the mun had actually simply removed them after being accepted.

Noted down your suggestion on giving a pass to curent members, which seems sound! I'm going to make a document with everybody's suggestions, for safekeeping. As for the tasks themselves--would something like, "which rule did you like best and why?" or "how many pokemon can one trainer keep?" be better? I'll have to look into the app system at both those games.

Thanks for the input!

[scudservetoface.livejournal.com]

This may just be me, but I think if we're going for a change, then it should be something that's actually related to the rules and FAQs. I mean, something like the ones suggested there seem rather out-of-place, and could also lead to more complaints. I think if you're going to let people go through reading all the FAQs and the rules, then it's more appropriate to put in questions that are actually related to them (i.e. how many pokemon can you have in total?)

Also on apps--- if it's easier for the mods that all of the apps be posted there rather than linked, I'd suggest that if there are spoilers in the content, then it'd be best if they just went and white-texted those parts instead? I don't see the difference much otherwise from how it is normally except a little less apps linked, but that's just me.

[sfaccendato.livejournal.com]

I basically agree with this -- the password system is already incredibly arbitrary and too easy to manipulate to be a good indicator or whether or not someone has actually read the rules/FAQ, and changing it to something equally arbitrary and easy to manipulate isn't going to make it any better. Something quizzing you on actual information in the FAQ, like how many Pokemon can you have, or asking which rule you like the best and why, would do a much better job, if you guys really want something like this in there.

[these_balls]

To both of you--gotcha! We'll definitely be going for something more Route-related in light of all this feedback. I really like the suggestions for questions you've given! That would be something that veteran players could do in a snap, and new players would have to look up. As for white-texting, we'll definitely consider it if the number of linked apps doesn't go down.

Thanks for taking the time!

[usedtelekinesis.livejournal.com]

Possibly unpopular opinion time!

Honestly, I don't like being forced to put an app in comments because some apps can be really long and I think it's neater to have one comment with a link rather than a pile of comments if there's a lot to explain or a person/character gets wordy. It also lets people go back and fix typos or coding errors without having to delete and repost the entire application. I know that other games require it and I can understand the reasoning for it, but I personally don't enjoy it and it'd make me a little less likely to app for anyone else if I had to guess how much text filled a comment box bit by bit.

And as for the password system, while it makes sense for new players, having to search for something arbitrary every single time I write an app is a little frustrating. Unless there's been a rules change, I don't see the point in constantly requiring it when people who know about it probably just ctrl+F for relevant phrases to see what it is this time.

[these_balls]

Unpopular opinions are allowed!

I understand your reticence! I also think a link looks neater. But having it all organized in the apps post saves us the trouble of, for instance, custom comment pages or having to open several tabs at once, and helps us keep things in order. It also allows us to keep apps for reference--like I mentioned above, there were problems recently where someone believed we'd accepted a samples-less app, when the player had simply removed them after being accepted. Does that help clear up our reasoning? I know it may not change your personal opinion on the matter, but I just wanted to make sure you knew we weren't doing this out of the blue.

Noted on the passwords! What about FAQ- or rules- related quizzing, as other have suggested: would that be a good compromise?

[miniworth]

I have a question regarding when, exactly, these changes take effect.

In one section you stated: This is a rule; as of today (the 11th of October), if your app is linked but not marked for spoilers, it will not be processed that week. Two sentences later, you claimed that you aren't changing anything... yet.

So when, exactly, are you going to put these changes into effect?

I'm actually glad to see action being taken, since this game was pretty idle in terms of moderation and regulation in the past few months, but the changes proposed here sound disconnected and, to be completely honest, announced in a cluttered and disorganized way.

Seconding Reine, I think there are other changes that are more relevant to the game (unanswered FAQ and inquiries, details of in-game functions that people are still unsure about more than a year after the game was opened) to address than how to submit an application...

or, and this is where I sound quite dickish, making it necessary for players, even ones who aren't new, to read through a long and un-updated FAQ because of a change in the way you make sure people have read it. It hasn't been updated, I cannot stress this enough. I realize I didn't suggest a better system than this when I contacted you a few weeks ago, but I'm... actually filled with feelings of (unsure) regarding the order you are doing this in.

[sfaccendato.livejournal.com]

I think they mean the "no changes yet" part specifically regarding the password system, not the linking. There's a gap between the two parts of the post where they're under different lj-cuts, and that sentence is the start of the second part.

[these_balls]

That's totally my bad! I've separated the post a little better; now I hope it's easier to understand that the two are separate. I meant that the new rule concerning apps, because it's a small thing, is being instated now, but nothing is being done concerning passwords until we get feedback from our players and come to a decision. If you'd like a deadline, I'd say two, maybe three weeks at the very longest?

As for why we're posting this now: we wanted to get this out and announced before a new wave of apps hit, so that people would be aware. My preference would have been to wait a few more days, but due to the nature of the app cycle, announcing it on a Monday seemed soundest.

As for the FAQ--it's being worked on! It's definitely #1 on our priority list and hasn't been forgotten. However, we also realize there are a lot of much smaller, easier things that can be fixed to make things more efficient, and...well, for lack of a better way to say it, we want to keep you, the players, in the loop. Just because we have small projects like this on our plate doesn't mean we aren't working on tackling the bigger things; I sincerely apologize if that's the way it seems.

[skillspanner]

Okay - I know some of this has been said, but rather than just pop an "agreed" or "disagreed" here, I'm just going to say it all to keep my own thoughts organized.

Regarding apps:

I personally dislike this, though the decision has been made already. There's a couple of reasons for this. The first is that it's really an inconvenience for the person posting the app. I understand you guys want to make it easier for yourselves and feel it's more organized, but... it's still not really a great solution. Posting apps in comments not only feels disjointed, but in general has so many flaws. It usually takes a couple of tries to even get the comments posted because you have to deal with the character limit. And if you make a typo, screw up coding, or anything else, you either have to edit a million times or delete the app entirely and repost it. I can safely say I have done this numerous times in games because I've messed up a link or caught a typo I made AFTER posting.

The second problem you have is that there's now a double-standard. Major spoilers count -- but nearly every canon has something with a major spoiler. If someone apps anything that came out in the last year, those are all major spoilers. Someone playing for an obscure canon isn't going to want to spoil people if they're hoping maybe they can get people into their fandom. Hell, I don't like throwing spoilers around for RPGs that have been out 3-4 years because I sure as hell know that I never loved that I knew the ending to half my games before I played them, many times from reading the apps pages of my games before anything else. Everyone's definition of a "major" spoiler of the level you described is different -- so how exactly are we supposed to know when it's okay and when it's not?

Regarding the Password System
Why do we need this at all?

I don't mean to sound like a jerk or anything, but I have wondered this from day one. There's always going to be an inherent flaw with this. The first is that if you're in the game already, presumably, you've read the rules and FAQ. Those people should be exempt to begin with.

But even for new players, it may be best to go with an honor system, because I've never seen any password/question based on reading rules/FAQ work. A lot of people, when they app into a new game will read the apps in queue to get an idea of criteria and general app styles. Doing this, you'll find those hidden things very easily -- it only takes peeking at one of two apps to figure out what's going on without ever going to the FAQ page if you really wanted to. It's flawed and it's actually something some people would consider a game breaker for them because it feels kind of like being a little kid who needs to repeat stuff back to their parents to prove they're listening.

I know and will admit that the last few apps I've done, I've looked at the last 3/4 apps for the password, then did a ctrl+f in the FAQ page to make sure it was the current one.



I'm sorry this is so long or if it came of as rude or anything! That's not my intent at all and I just wanted to point out the things I see wrong with it. You don't have to answer the parts you've covered with other people, either. I've read through everything so while I know, I still needed to say it (mostly so it didn't feel disjointed). I'm glad to see you guys are being proactive with making changes, but I think some real kinks need to be worked out with some of these systems, too.

[usedtelekinesis.livejournal.com]

You put a lot of my opinions (posted a few comments up) into words clearer than I ended up being capable of. Thank you.

[these_balls]

Hey there! I'm going to try to be as clear and concise as possible, but it's the morning so I beg your pardon in case this turns out more disjointed than intended.

Regarding apps;

Is posting apps really that much of an inconvenience? I don't mean to sound rude by that question--it's just that in order to post an app, your options are either 'link it', or 'post it'. So presumably posting is what a potential apper would have done in the first place, had linking not been an option. Time-wise, they're relatively similar, and if you really want to avoid having to calculate character or word counts (and I absolutely cannot blame you on this, it's a pain), the simple solution is to divide your post by sections rather than word count. Having more (uneven) comments for your app might look messy, but it gets the job done more effectively than trying to figure out whether to cut things off at paragraph 4 or 5.

We chose it because this was the solution we could find that was the least fussy and easiest to implement for everyone involved. We definitely understand it's going to take some time before people settle into posting instead of linking, and we'll take the pulse of things after a few app rounds to see how things are going. We're trying to be more on the ball and more responsive here, not less, so please don't think we're dismissing you. Any feedback helps.

Your comment on spoilers is duly noted--we'll test run the new system for a few app rounds, and if linking doesn't decrease, we'll consider white-texting, as someone has proposed, or simply marking the entire app post for spoilers. To be more specific on what kind of things we mean by 'spoilers', we're talking things that absolutely have to be mentioned in, say, the personality section because it was a LIFE CHANGING EVENT, or a history write-up, since most canon wikis have their own spoiler-cuts. I hear you on spoilers for older canons, but we feel it would be unreasonable to expect, say, a Vanitas player not to expose his face more than six months after the canon has come out, even though it constitutes a spoiler.

Regarding passwords;

The short answer: we have the password system because Route is huge, and there's too much information and too many new people apping each round to risk new players coming in blind. We know it's flawed; that's why we want to change it.

The long answer: Route has, physically, the biggestsetting of any LJRP I've been in. (I don't want to speak in absolutes, since I can't possibly claim to know every RP out there.) Multiple cities, roads that take weeks to travel, Teams, over two hundred creatures with types and weaknesses...and maybe, at some point, whole new regions (but you didn't hear it from me). Compound this with a game mechanic that spans a series of real-life video games that not all our players are familiar with to start, and you can see that not having everybody on the same page is a recipe for disaster. Of course, on our end, we're working on updating the FAQ and streamlining things. This is part of that process. We know the password system is flawed; that's why we want to make it better. But the honor system feels inadequate for a game of this size.

We'll definitely consider exempting veteran players from giving us passwords or completing tasks--if we do change the system--because that seems really sound, or try to devise a solution that veteran players would easily be able to answer and new players would have to look up.


Your response wasn't rude and I hope mine didn't come off that way, either! I really hope this helped clear a couple things up. Ugh, why do morning exist? Thanks for helping us out with your lovely feedback. The more information we get, the more we can change things for the better!

[puzzling]

Just throwing my own two cents into this! It will probably be similar to others, but might as well throw mine in.

I personally feel that the password system or even the new proposed replacement for them doesn't really help when it comes to terms of reading the FAQs and Rules.

The passwords can be extremely easy for people to find by simply going ctrl+f with them or looking at other people's applications for the password they have used. The same thing can be done with the task system, but if we have to choose one, I will say that the task system is much more better though make it a task more relevant to the FAQS/Rules? Something like answer the question with the information in those two sections or the question itself being about them. It at least assures that people have read a little of it.

However, I think if you guys are going to keep this password/task system in, maybe you should exempt it from people already playing in the game. Those who are already in Route will probably already know all the rules and basic FAQ stuff, so this seems just like extra work to them. It's mainly the new players that need to know this so perhaps this system should only be applied to them.

As for the apps part, my opinion has been echoed already in terms of that I prefer linking because of character limit, editing, app-stealing, etc etc. The decision has already been made, but this is just my own opinion on it. I personally like linking because of typos or html code failure. When I post it in my journal, I can easily fix it but in comments, either edit it a million times or delete the whole thing in general. If there are custom pages that you're concerned about, then I suggest that maybe putting a note in the apps saying "if you're linking, please make sure to keep custom comment off".

This has gotten longer than I have thought it will, but yeah, just my thoughts on this. Sorry in advance if any of this sounds confusing or rude! I really appreciate everything you guys are doing right now and gathering our opinions like this, so keep it up!

[these_balls]

Hey, Ichi!

Yep, we're definitely going to work on making the task system (if we implement, nothing's set in stone, here) more FAQ- and Rules- related, like a quiz. And we'll also absolutely consider exempting veteran players if we do, as many of you have asked.

As for the apps--without repeating what I said to Aly up there, it's the app-stealing I'd like to address. I don't understand how linking deters app thieves...isn't the app public for the few days it's awaiting a verdict, anyway? If what worries you is the app staying up after acceptance, then of course, you can always PM the mods and ask us to screen it! We've done it in the past and we'll be happy to do it again in the future with any posted apps we receive, and we feel that would be safest and most convenient for everyone. We have the apps organized and on-file, other applicants can see what we look for, and applicants who don't want their app public can request to have it hidden from prying eyes.

Also, posting doesn't mean you can't put it in your journal, for your own convenience and that of castmates, as well as to fix any HTML mistakes you might find before you put it up for inspection. And as for typos...don't worry, we're a pretty forgiving bunch. We use computers, too! we know how finicky they can get.

I hope this cleared up some things and eased your mind concerning the new app rule! Thanks for taking the time to let us know your opinion. It's great to see everyone giving us feedback!

[springoflife]

I hope you don't mind if I add my own (somehow unpopular, from what I see) opinion to this! Well, to be honest, I... prefer comments to linking! It's just me, but I find them neater that way. I can see how coding fail or typos can make life difficult in those, but I don't think it's that much of an issue, so personally, I don't see a problem here.

However, as already mentioned by some, the spoilers policy seems double-standard. I mean: have you honestly seen an app without spoilers? The answer is no; every app in history had, has and will have spoilers within itself -- bigger or smaller, but spoilers nonetheless. Some that are not considered major may still ruin a canon for someone (an example here, and since it's, well, a spoiler (for SMT:P3), I'll white it out: Chidori's death perhaps wasn't the most shocking spoiler in the entire game, but for someone who's just started playing it, it is a big thing). Now the question is, who is to decide what is a major spoiler and what isn't? Personally, I think that by reading an app, you fully agree to bear the consequences: people should be aware there may be spoilers lurking in the app, and it's their risk and responsibility if they choose to read it anyway.

And as for the password... Yeah, I agree it's laughably easy to go around; however, I think the tasks you provided examples of would be the same. Just CTRL+F "task" and done! The idea of rules/FAQ-centric questions that has been mentioned above is better, but it's also true that the players who are already in-game shouldn't be made to go through all of it again. I mean, I go to FAQ frequently (hence the name of the section, huh?) because my memory's not perfect and I need to check if it's okay to rename a Pokémon, what the limit is, what the current weather affects, HOW TO WRITE THAT GODDAMN "é"... I imagine (hope?) a lot of players consult the page on regular basis, so is there really a point in making them study it all again when they probably look up things there already...?

... Wow, that is a lot of tl;dr I'M SORRY. But yes, I'm done. Sorry if it comes off rude (I DIDN'T MEAN TO) and/or doesn't make any sense ;;

[springoflife]

sazkldfjsdklgdlkh I KNEW I FORGOT SOMETHING

It's re: apps still. Like I mentioned, I don't see a problem with having to put them in comments instead of linking. I understand how it makes your lives much easier, and a happy mod is a happy game, huh? Still, I find the "link --> not proceeding this week" rule a little... too strict. I see how it's a rule to be obeyed, but still. I'd say clearly stating "PLEASE PUT YOUR APPLICATION IN COMMENTS. DO NOT LINK, IT WILL MAKE OUR JOB EASIER!" should be enough? Perhaps it's me being naïve, but I do believe people who want to be accepted would do as asked to. In C&C, for example, the mods clearly ask for the app to be linked if exceeding three comments, and to my knowledge, there's few incidents of applying players not following that.

OKAY NOW I'M DONE FOR REAL.

[crimsondirge]

Honestly, I'm siding in with the "do away with the password system entirely" group. I don't like it, I've never liked it, and honestly, usually? If a game has a system like that, I don't join, because I hate having to go back to an FAQ and look for it when I've already read it, it feels weighted down and condescending. People that don't want to read the rules/FAQ are generally quickly obvious, and it's an easy system to cheat; people that DO obey the rules tend to be the ones that get in trouble, and I admit to pre-writing my apps on occasion and having to go back and doublecheck that the words haven't changed is a pain in the rear. So-- yeah, I do not like them. :(

As for applications, I support making them in one place and not linked, in part because then if there's ever a problematic player, their app is THERE and POSTED and you know they didn't go back and edit it to suit their needs or anything. Plus it's easier on prospective appers, I think, when they want to just look over apps to see what they should expect, if they can just hit expand instead of following links to different journals and occasionally eye-searing layouts.

Am I making sense? I just woke up.

[these_balls]

On passwords: like I outlined to Yosuke-mun above, Route is simply too big, with way too much information to take in, to expect all our new players will have read the FAQ without prompting. That's why we'd rather change the password system instead of doing away with it entirely; we're aware how flawed it is. I hope that clarifies our reasoning on the issue a bit better? Would something like a 'FAQ quiz', as others have suggested--quizzing applicants on parts of the FAQ, such that a veteran player would know and a new player would have to look up--be acceptable to you? Do you think veteran players should be exempt?

You're making plenty of sense, no worries.

[stowsaway.livejournal.com]

YEAH OFFERING OPINIONS TIME.

- Apps/linking: I don't see a problem with this change in policy. I mean, yeah, there's the potential for errors while posting, but I think the pros basically outweigh the cons? As in, no sneaky editing, easier for the mods to process them, etc. Personally, I also like apps in the comments just because you can go back and read them later- a friend of mine, a great friend of mine!, she tends to delete her apps after she gets accepted somewhere, and I'm always like nooooooooo I wanted to reread it!! Besides that, hell, you guys are mods and if it makes it easier for you to do your job? GO FOR IT.

—But that said, I agree with a few of the comments that retroactively applying it to this week's apps is a little harsh. Could you possibly just leave apps a comment like, "hey! could you please post this on the page?" along with updating the post with the new rule? It seems unfair that someone who might not have seen the announcement would be held accountable for it, especially given the lack of notice.

- As for the password system, I basically agree that it is somewhat easy to cheat by reading other applications, and just arbitrarily changing words is a little frustrating. I remember I had to read the FAQ twice to find it, just because it was a random word in a random spot. I like the idea of a question based on the FAQ- for example, in Gargleblasted, they ask "What is the name of the universal translator plug-in, and what are two ways to earn money in the game?" Sure, it can still be cheated, but at least even the cheaters will know how to take jobs? And it gives you some indication on where to look for the answers, as opposed to "random word randomly somewhere."

—Mostly, however, I think changing the password is just an exercise in frustration. The only time it's really relevant to know the password is the first time you app a character and are new to the game- then it's important to read the FAQ. And likewise, the only people affected by the change of password are people already in the game! A new player will read the FAQ to learn everything and find the password, theoretically while doing the former. It makes no difference to them if it's the same one as ever or what (assuming they're naive and not "cheating"). However a returning player will simply be looking for the changed password so they can submit their app, so changing the password really just forces someone who has already been accepted to go treasure hunting!

—-I think personally, a slightly open-ended question would work best. For example, "name two different part-time jobs available in towns," out of however many you have listed in the FAQ. This would let seasoned players answer without having to go hunting (since they're presumably know), and give enough variety in the apps that you can't just copy-paste whatever the app above you said. (Of course, people still would, but that's just a fact of password systems…)

Wow, I'm sorry this got so tl;dr!!! I DIDN'T MEAN TO I SWEAR.

[these_balls]

TL;DR IS FINE o9

- Regarding apps: goodness, we must come off as some crazy hardasses...all of these things you outlined--leaving a note, along with a reminder--was our intention all along! We would never outright ignore an app, that would be terrible modding, and just plain rude besides. For instance, if an applicant posts an app with the wrong password, we leave them a note asking them to please post the correct passwords, and process the app only once that's been done. We'd be doing something similar with the new app rule, which is in BIG BOLD FONT on the app page itself. As for lack of notice--applicants who post their app before the 14th (a three-day window) will get a PM'd reminder from us about the new app rule. We definitely wouldn't want anyone to get penalized!

- Concerning passwords; yes, the open-ended question system seems the most likely, if we change the system at all. As has been said, nothing's been decided yet, we're just seeing what all of you think before we do anything. That said, we really do appreciate all the feedback we're getting!

Thanks for posting a reply!

[nasa-dreams.livejournal.com]

There is no option for "Fine either way" and that is what I am. :)

[these_balls]

Noted! :3b

[bakuhadera.livejournal.com]

How is linking apps considered negative? Just asking out of general curiosity here because any time I've ever modded a game, I've opened tabs to each application I had to read and then went through them like a check list. Having an app all in one place doesn't seem any different than opening a tab to those app comments to me. But I am sorry I caused an inconvenience with mine when I did that. I just saw it as a chance, as an apper, to not have to worry about character limits in my comments. It's the single-most annoying thing I've ever found about doing an app in the first place.

On a more constructive note... If you're worried about the password so much, I would suggest putting it into the faq section and have it set as a screened comment post. This way, you can force new acceptances into commenting to let you know they've read through it. Though it seems easier to just have it apply to players who are new to the game, since older or current players would likely already know this information. This might require the mods to make a master list of players (new and old) that only they can see and crosscheck apps with players, but it would be worth it. And if people don't comment for whatever reason, the mods could always gently nudge them that way as a reminder that they're important information. I say the faq section, though, because as important as the rules really are in any game... they're all pretty much the same in every game anyway. Reading that section becomes redundant, and people generally skim through for any major discrepancies each comm might have to their particular set. Something that's hidden in a rules section can be easily missed if people aren't paying enough attention, but a faq section forces people to at least read through more carefully since it's important information on how the game really works.

I'm not sure my suggestion is helpful, but it would be an alternative to having past appers go through the pain of rereading reference material for any new password on another character they're applying for. Unless you completely disregard that section entirely if they're still a current player? Which might be more helpful entirely XD;

...edited because I read through it afterward and it made no sense at all in some areas. Hopefully this is better. @@ And I really shouldn't comment when I'm tired lol.

[these_balls]

It isn't negative! Or at least, it would definitely be less noticeable for us, if say, Route got somewhere around 10-15 apps a week. But Route gets, on average, about 25 apps per app round, sometimes more, sometimes less, but at least 20.

With 25-odd apps and three to five mods checking them every week (and we can't necessarily split them up, since each app has to be approved by at the very least 2 people, to avoid stuff like cast bias), having everything in one place saves us time and energy we can otherwise spend actually checking apps. Compound that with the fact that note every LJ user knows how to turn off custom comment pages, and the convenience of being able to keep track of everything as much as possible for future reference...I realize that as an ex-mod you probably know all this already, but I just wanted to clarify for anyone else who might be reading.

No one individually caused an inconvenience--it's just an effect that stacks with time. One or two linked apps isn't a hassle. Ten out of twenty, with five of those in strange colors, is what becomes daunting. We didn't want to overhaul the system or anything, this just seemed like most mess-free solution for everybody involved.

As much as I think your proposed solution re: passwords has merit, I think it would work very well in a small game. I'm not sure how applicable it would be in a game as big as Route, though. With over a hundred players handling a few hundred characters, the seven of us put in enough time keeping track of starters, the taken lists, the drops and apps every week, I can't imagine adding a list that big to the pile. Not to mention, it would get really confusing if someone apped and dropped a character, then re-apped say, six months later, or players using the same handle, etc. Essentially, I'm sure it would work fine for a smaller game, but it seems like too complex a solution for us.

Your suggestion is helpful--any feedback is precious. And I hear you about the rules being similar in every game; we feel they merit emphasis, though, so we're not likely to take the spotlight off them. What we ARE considering is a system that seasoned players would have little trouble with, and that new players would have to look up. But nothing's been changed yet, and we might not even change a thing, depending on how the poll turns out.

I hope that clears up our reasoning a bit? Thanks for taking the time to let us know your thoughts!

[fullmetalbro.livejournal.com]

I personally have no preference to the password system. I really don't care if it is changed or not, so long as the final verdict is posted.

[these_balls]

The verdict would definitely be posted, don't worry about that!

[papas_bunnydoll]

if your app is linked but not marked for spoilers, it will not be processed that week

If I read that right, you just have to put up that there are spoilers in your ap so you can link it...which means that anything that could be a spoiler for a canon (and yes some older canons still have considered spoilers; for example: there is a character who's background in Weiss is not known by everyone and it would be a major issue to someone who is watching or wanting to watch w/out knowing this) would make it possible for you to link your ap.

[these_balls]

Well, we ask for our players to use common sense with this, like in all things; we ask that only big spoilers be placed under a link. What defines a 'big' spoiler might be up for interpretation, but if we see a lot of abuse, we'll crack down.