Post by Sumira on Dec 13, 2005 12:43:54 GMT -5
Here is some things Kysha and I were going over earlier. Feel free to comment on things that you wish to comment on!
Start of Kisa buffer: Tue Dec 13 12:45:54 2005
Session Ident: Kisa (~get@cm203.omega36.maxonline.com.sg)
[11:16] <Kisa> is d spreadsheet oki?
[11:17] <Kisa> i shall post it if it is
[11:39] <sumi> oh umm
[11:39] <sumi> just saw this XD
[11:40] <sumi> 1 question
[11:41] <sumi> seneca's line looks wrong to me
[11:41] <sumi> i swear it seems like a long time since i've seen him
[11:41] <sumi> is his line right?
[11:41] <sumi> says he last attended 10/9 and has various excused absenses
since then
[11:42] <sumi> when i figured he'd be down with the inactives
[11:42] <Kisa> yeah thats the thing i was talking about..
[11:43] <Kisa> cos he's marked as weekly wednesday gone..
[11:43] <Kisa> so do i still consider him as 8-runs... include the supposed
weekly excuse?
[11:44] <Kisa> see, that smartass
[11:44] <Kisa> he was gone for 7 runs, then he notified us for the 8th run
[11:44] <Kisa> so doesnt that shove him back into activity, or do you mean
*any* 8 excused absence will mean inactivity?
[11:47] <sumi> not sure
[11:48] <Kisa> how2be sure D:
[11:48] <sumi> i think in the end though inactivity should occur after a
fixed amount of runs regardless of excused or unexcused
[11:49] <sumi> cause like... if someone notifies us that they're going to
Iraq until they come home alive, we can just say ok you're excused
indefinitely and your spot will be held
[11:49] <sumi> people have to realize that dynamis is a long-term commitment
and that even short disruptions can affect the shell greatly
[11:50] <sumi> so i dunno, i figure if someone is gone for like 8 in a row
regardless of excused or not, they should go inactive or something
[11:50] <sumi> basically if someone is gone for more than 8 runs regardless,
any runs after the first 8 that they're gone shouldn't be excused when
considering their attendance until they return
[11:51] <Kisa> i agree, but ive always tried giving ppl chances..
[11:51] <sumi> cause if i join RB and go 100% of the runs and then say i'm
not going to play for say 3 months, i come back, i shouldn't have 100%
attendance
[11:51] <Kisa> yeah
[11:51] <Kisa> ok, i will change it
[11:51] <sumi> yeah i don't want to penalize for RL
[11:52] <Kisa> lotsa ppl going inactive then >.>
[11:52] <sumi> but if it's indefinite or <long time> we can't keep someone
at a 100% attendance rating when someone that might be coming all those 3
months and maybe miss 1 unexcused run end up with like 97%
[11:52] <sumi> it wouldn't make sense
[11:52] <sumi> so we won't penalize RL "within reason"
[11:54] <sumi> while a month doesn't seem like a long time in RL of course
[11:54] <sumi> it's a long time in Dynamis
[11:54] <sumi> it's like 1/7th of our total runs
[11:55] <sumi> i dunno how else to do it
[11:56] <sumi> only so much we can really do for them
[11:56] <sumi> even like this we have a true % for ppl that are consistent
[11:57] <sumi> but ppl that are gone for long periods get an 8-run padding
to their % before we leave them on their own
[11:57] <sumi> i'm trying to think as a consistent person but also a person
that might need to leave for a while
[11:57] <Kisa> its good thinking, i agree with you for the most part
[11:57] <sumi> if i had to leave for 2 months i wouldn't expect to come back
and be equal
[11:58] <sumi> i would hope to be able to be reinstated given my past w/ the
shell
[11:58] <sumi> but in the end if there wasn't room when i got back, no harm
done
[11:58] <sumi> can't go to Dynamis without active WHMs
[11:58] <Kisa> i wont count zone restrictions in them tho right
[11:58] <Kisa> thatd be unfair
[11:59] <sumi> especially now with the new zones XD
[11:59] <Kisa> volrath's track record looks horrible
[11:59] <sumi> yes
[11:59] <sumi> i posted about volrath
[11:59] <sumi> like i said, i felt like he was a good friend in MG
[11:59] <sumi> but i would vote /kick for him in RB
[11:59] <sumi> his record is horrible
[12:00] <sumi> like some other ppeople said in the policy discussions
[12:00] <Kisa> my % went down!
[12:00] <Kisa> ;o;!
[12:00] <sumi> we should concentrate on kicking the people that aren't
supporting the shell
[12:00] <sumi> and replacing them with people that do
[12:00] <sumi> maybe it was Kiera's post
[12:01] <sumi> yes if someone doesn't have access to a zone, that will
always be excused and not counted against attendance %
[12:01] <sumi> especially since it can be a limited thing
[12:01] <sumi> though if someone avoided getting access to bcd and xarc it
become a problem, but i don't see why they would do that
[12:01] <sumi> since the best AF is there
[12:03] <Kisa>
[12:03] <Kisa> j00 r a smrt person!
[12:04] <sumi> the winning poll is 4 unexcused, 1 lot restriction, and 8
removal
[12:04] <sumi> i think i'll add to that what we've talked about
[12:05] <Kisa> one mroe question
[12:05] <sumi> that 8 runs since we've last seen you at a run will = inactive
[12:05] <Kisa> people like enneiseivoli.. i guess ive marked down as special
case
[12:05] <sumi> regardless of excused or unexcused
[12:05] <Kisa> but that dude has been gone a longass time
[12:05] <Kisa> usually we 'remove' these people after 16 runs
[12:06] <Kisa> but since its 'special case'... how the hell long are we
gonna keep em in inactive?
[12:06] <sumi> last i heard about him he was playing yingyang
[12:06] <sumi> or yingling whatever
[12:06] <Kisa> haha yingyang!
[12:06] <Kisa> well yeah he's always on during dynamis, on the boat, fishing
[12:06] <sumi> he applied to RB again as yingling months ago
[12:06] <sumi> and since then has "school" or something
[12:07] <sumi> i think he should be removed too
[12:07] <Kisa> apparently one of the SHs (was it sah, or nara) says that
dynamis is too 'hectic'
[12:07] <Kisa> but fishing he does while he works on hw
[12:07] <Kisa> so.. been there a longass time
[12:07] <sumi> yeah
[12:07] <Kisa> aoki as well
[12:07] <sumi> well we have no reason to hold his spot
[12:07] <sumi> aoki is back in game
[12:07] <Kisa> but aoki is back..
[12:07] <Kisa> yeah so the question is
[12:07] <sumi> she was going to go to the last run
[12:08] <Kisa> what defines how long ppl can stay on the inactive list as a
'special case'?
[12:08] <sumi> but supposedly her account was robbed
[12:08] <sumi> i think in the excell we should keep data for everyone
[12:09] <sumi> i think we need another section at the bottom for "removed"
[12:09] <sumi> the current winning vote is 4 "unexcused" runs = inactive
[12:09] <sumi> 8 "unexcused" runs = removal
[12:09] <Kisa> sumi the section is there
[12:09] <Kisa> its just hidden
[12:09] <sumi> oh ok
[12:09] <Kisa> takes too long to scroll down to run totals if i dont hide it
[12:09] <sumi> ok np
[12:10] <Kisa> so thats my qn, when do i move inactive special case to n/a
list
[12:10] <sumi> so that's unexcused
[12:10] <Kisa> cos inactive (normal) is moved to n/a after 16 absences
[12:10] <sumi> if one of those ppl comes back before hitting the "removed"
list, they just go through the 1 run lot restriction
[12:10] <sumi> but
[12:10] <sumi> if they have excused runs in the mix, we'll double it
[12:10] <sumi> if someone hits 8 (in a row) excused or unexcused runs they
go inactive list
[12:11] <sumi> if someone hits 16 (in a row) excused or unexcused runs they
go removed list
[12:11] <Kisa> 2 run restriction!
[12:11] <sumi> removed list means if they come back they need to "reapp"
[12:11] <Kisa> hmmm even if its like aoki and ennei?
[12:12] <Kisa> or zara who is 'moving'
[12:12] <sumi> well there are always exceptions, ennei i don't really think
fits
[12:12] <sumi> aoki physically didn't have a ps2 to play for a couple months
[12:13] <sumi> and since we need DRG mains, i don't mind letting her back
[12:13] <sumi> no one to vote against her cept Diogy
[12:13] <sumi> i'm hesitant to kick zara since he has no reason to stay XD
[12:14] <sumi> but if we kick his chances of coming back for a different
job's AF, are zero
[12:14] <sumi> in my mind
[12:14] <sumi> i'm still unsure about what to do about Drzaus' post about
THF and MNK
[12:14] <sumi> i knew that's been coming for sooo long
[12:14] <sumi> i'm tempted to leave it to the new policy, MNK mainlot + SH
vote
[12:15] <sumi> if he is rejected he'll probably leave and ppl will flame him
[12:15] <Kisa> well... i dont think mnk is too highly contested
[12:15] <sumi> the piece he needs is needed by like 6 mnks
[12:15] <sumi> i think
[12:16] <Kisa> u should post about this in SH section
[12:16] <Kisa> see what the rest say
[12:16] <Kisa> zara talked to me and said he's interested in currency bla bla
[12:16] <Kisa> excuses bout internet connection n lag
[12:16] <sumi> >.>
[12:16] <sumi> i think i might just save time and paste this into SH section
[12:17] <sumi> so now is the time to wave to everyone and make fun of
sahearniitth
[12:17] <Kisa> HI CASKAA KISS PLZ
[12:17] * sumi waves to <everyone> and makes fun of sahearniitth
[12:17] <Kisa> SAHEARNIITTH IS A PERV
[12:17] <Kisa> NARA SUX
[12:17] <sumi> haha
[12:17] <Kisa> MUFFINS IS.. yknow, just there.
[12:17] <Kisa> k im done
[12:17] <sumi>
[12:19] <Kisa> sooo.. moving ennei out..
[12:19] <Kisa> should we even vote on this
[12:20] <sumi> no
[12:21] <sumi> i will live by this from now on
[12:21] <sumi> "I also agree with TT. I'm really tired of hearing people
"pregnant dogging" (lmao at the language filter on these boards) at others
for winning lots on AF. If we feel like there are attendance problems
within the shell (which I think there are some), then we should deal with
those attendance issues. If people are found to be selectively skipping,
they should be removed from the shell. Beyond that, distribution of AF
should be left to the lotting process. Like it or not, luck is a factor in
this game. Trying to remove it entirely is stupid, imo. It won't always
turn out fair, but I think a system like this would cause far more
problems than the luck factor does."
[12:22] <sumi> if someone has attendance problems period we'll act on it
[12:22] <sumi> i'm pretty sure aoki wants to come back to RB
[12:23] <sumi> she's only been in game for a week so far
[12:23] <sumi> and been dealing with her account being robbed
[12:23] <sumi> i'll leave aoki to the SH and diogy
[12:23] <sumi> ennei just remove
[12:23] <Kisa> hrmm..
[12:23] <sumi> since volrath is high profile we might wanna vote
[12:23] <Kisa> is it a double standard?
[12:23] <sumi> but with his record i lean towards plain removing
[12:23] <Kisa> well volrath has never been gone for 16 runs in a row
[12:24] <sumi> no it's not, if ennei wants to do dynamis again, he'll have
to reapp too
[12:24] <sumi> same with volrath
[12:24] <Kisa> nyu i meant aoki
[12:25] <sumi> everyone is welcome to reapp
[12:25] <sumi> right aoki will reapp, meaning SH + Diogy vote
[12:25] <Kisa> [01:21] <sumi> i'll leave aoki to the SH and diogy <-- means
i will move Aoki to N/A list for now ok?
[12:25] <Kisa> then vote, then reinstate if required
[12:25] <sumi> right
[12:29] <sumi> i'm tempted to say the top 36 will go to the first round of
the new zones
[12:29] <sumi> if ppl are found going with other shells in the meantime,
they will be removed as normal
[12:30] <sumi> and our population will eventually get down to 36
[12:30] <Kisa> haha
[12:30] <Kisa> well, throw it out as an idea i guess
[12:30] <Kisa> id like to say that maybe restricting low attendance ppl is a
little harsh
[12:31] <sumi> i was going to put that attending the new zones will not
affect your RB attendance whatsoever (those zones attendance will be
tracked seperately)
[12:31] <Kisa> so i was thinkin maybe like.. for 1 or 2 months they can try
new dynamis
[12:31] <Kisa> with other shells
[12:31] <Kisa> but it can only be when RB does these zones
[12:31] <Kisa> and it cant butt in with the week's second run timing
[12:32] <Kisa> not tough since all the NA LSes like to squeeze in on
wednesday -_-
[12:34] <sumi> well the top 36 thing isn't permanent
[12:34] <sumi> just a small "reward"
[12:35] <sumi> i don't see it as penalizing the lower attendance people,
though the ones screaming for high attendance rewards will probably see it
that way
[12:35] <Kisa> well...
[12:35] <Kisa> i mean like, if you were, say, #45
[12:36] <Kisa> and basically RB leaders telling you "no, you can't do new
areas w/ us, and no, you can't do new areas w/ anyone else"
[12:36] <Kisa> thats quite a slap in the face
[12:36] <Kisa> i would leave the LS if it were me
[12:36] <Kisa> i think its reasonable to say its ok *if* we are doing these
zones at that same time, sure, they can go join other ppl
[12:37] <Kisa> but only if it doesnt affect, say, our sunday run and them
being unable to attend it cos they have to wait 72hrs or what crap
[12:38] <Kisa> kisa.akubi.de/rustysheet.zip <-- new version w/ all ur
input... please lookie!
[12:41] <sumi> well the only other fair suggestion is first-come first-serve
[12:41] <sumi> problem with that is we dunno if we'll have the right job mix
in that group
[12:41] <sumi> where we can already see the attendance group
[12:42] <sumi> i see what you're saying kisa, that sounds ok to me
[12:42] <Kisa>
[12:42] <sumi> and after we've hit each new zone we should have come up with
an answer for the rest of the shell
[12:43] <sumi> i personally wouldn't mind a break from attendance
[12:43] <sumi> we could ask for ppl to volunteer their spots in the top 36
for later runs
[12:43] <sumi> and it would be a free break
[12:43] <sumi> anyway
[12:43] <sumi> i have to scoot
[12:44] <sumi> gotta drive an hour to a conference with my boss and one of
our clients
[12:44] <Kisa> kk scoot~ i will post the new spreadsheet up in a couple of
mins..
[12:44] <Kisa> or should i wait till tomorrow @.@
[12:44] <sumi> doing a new product demo for disaster recovery software
[12:44] <Kisa> oo o.o oki gl!
[12:44] <Kisa> see uuuu
[12:44] <sumi> you can wait til tomorrow
[12:44] <Kisa> okidoki
[12:44] <sumi> i'll post this for SH now XD
[12:44] <Kisa> k!
End of Kisa buffer Tue Dec 13 12:45:54 2005
Start of Kisa buffer: Tue Dec 13 12:45:54 2005
Session Ident: Kisa (~get@cm203.omega36.maxonline.com.sg)
[11:16] <Kisa> is d spreadsheet oki?
[11:17] <Kisa> i shall post it if it is
[11:39] <sumi> oh umm
[11:39] <sumi> just saw this XD
[11:40] <sumi> 1 question
[11:41] <sumi> seneca's line looks wrong to me
[11:41] <sumi> i swear it seems like a long time since i've seen him
[11:41] <sumi> is his line right?
[11:41] <sumi> says he last attended 10/9 and has various excused absenses
since then
[11:42] <sumi> when i figured he'd be down with the inactives
[11:42] <Kisa> yeah thats the thing i was talking about..
[11:43] <Kisa> cos he's marked as weekly wednesday gone..
[11:43] <Kisa> so do i still consider him as 8-runs... include the supposed
weekly excuse?
[11:44] <Kisa> see, that smartass
[11:44] <Kisa> he was gone for 7 runs, then he notified us for the 8th run
[11:44] <Kisa> so doesnt that shove him back into activity, or do you mean
*any* 8 excused absence will mean inactivity?
[11:47] <sumi> not sure
[11:48] <Kisa> how2be sure D:
[11:48] <sumi> i think in the end though inactivity should occur after a
fixed amount of runs regardless of excused or unexcused
[11:49] <sumi> cause like... if someone notifies us that they're going to
Iraq until they come home alive, we can just say ok you're excused
indefinitely and your spot will be held
[11:49] <sumi> people have to realize that dynamis is a long-term commitment
and that even short disruptions can affect the shell greatly
[11:50] <sumi> so i dunno, i figure if someone is gone for like 8 in a row
regardless of excused or not, they should go inactive or something
[11:50] <sumi> basically if someone is gone for more than 8 runs regardless,
any runs after the first 8 that they're gone shouldn't be excused when
considering their attendance until they return
[11:51] <Kisa> i agree, but ive always tried giving ppl chances..
[11:51] <sumi> cause if i join RB and go 100% of the runs and then say i'm
not going to play for say 3 months, i come back, i shouldn't have 100%
attendance
[11:51] <Kisa> yeah
[11:51] <Kisa> ok, i will change it
[11:51] <sumi> yeah i don't want to penalize for RL
[11:52] <Kisa> lotsa ppl going inactive then >.>
[11:52] <sumi> but if it's indefinite or <long time> we can't keep someone
at a 100% attendance rating when someone that might be coming all those 3
months and maybe miss 1 unexcused run end up with like 97%
[11:52] <sumi> it wouldn't make sense
[11:52] <sumi> so we won't penalize RL "within reason"
[11:54] <sumi> while a month doesn't seem like a long time in RL of course
[11:54] <sumi> it's a long time in Dynamis
[11:54] <sumi> it's like 1/7th of our total runs
[11:55] <sumi> i dunno how else to do it
[11:56] <sumi> only so much we can really do for them
[11:56] <sumi> even like this we have a true % for ppl that are consistent
[11:57] <sumi> but ppl that are gone for long periods get an 8-run padding
to their % before we leave them on their own
[11:57] <sumi> i'm trying to think as a consistent person but also a person
that might need to leave for a while
[11:57] <Kisa> its good thinking, i agree with you for the most part
[11:57] <sumi> if i had to leave for 2 months i wouldn't expect to come back
and be equal
[11:58] <sumi> i would hope to be able to be reinstated given my past w/ the
shell
[11:58] <sumi> but in the end if there wasn't room when i got back, no harm
done
[11:58] <sumi> can't go to Dynamis without active WHMs
[11:58] <Kisa> i wont count zone restrictions in them tho right
[11:58] <Kisa> thatd be unfair
[11:59] <sumi> especially now with the new zones XD
[11:59] <Kisa> volrath's track record looks horrible
[11:59] <sumi> yes
[11:59] <sumi> i posted about volrath
[11:59] <sumi> like i said, i felt like he was a good friend in MG
[11:59] <sumi> but i would vote /kick for him in RB
[11:59] <sumi> his record is horrible
[12:00] <sumi> like some other ppeople said in the policy discussions
[12:00] <Kisa> my % went down!
[12:00] <Kisa> ;o;!
[12:00] <sumi> we should concentrate on kicking the people that aren't
supporting the shell
[12:00] <sumi> and replacing them with people that do
[12:00] <sumi> maybe it was Kiera's post
[12:01] <sumi> yes if someone doesn't have access to a zone, that will
always be excused and not counted against attendance %
[12:01] <sumi> especially since it can be a limited thing
[12:01] <sumi> though if someone avoided getting access to bcd and xarc it
become a problem, but i don't see why they would do that
[12:01] <sumi> since the best AF is there
[12:03] <Kisa>
[12:03] <Kisa> j00 r a smrt person!
[12:04] <sumi> the winning poll is 4 unexcused, 1 lot restriction, and 8
removal
[12:04] <sumi> i think i'll add to that what we've talked about
[12:05] <Kisa> one mroe question
[12:05] <sumi> that 8 runs since we've last seen you at a run will = inactive
[12:05] <Kisa> people like enneiseivoli.. i guess ive marked down as special
case
[12:05] <sumi> regardless of excused or unexcused
[12:05] <Kisa> but that dude has been gone a longass time
[12:05] <Kisa> usually we 'remove' these people after 16 runs
[12:06] <Kisa> but since its 'special case'... how the hell long are we
gonna keep em in inactive?
[12:06] <sumi> last i heard about him he was playing yingyang
[12:06] <sumi> or yingling whatever
[12:06] <Kisa> haha yingyang!
[12:06] <Kisa> well yeah he's always on during dynamis, on the boat, fishing
[12:06] <sumi> he applied to RB again as yingling months ago
[12:06] <sumi> and since then has "school" or something
[12:07] <sumi> i think he should be removed too
[12:07] <Kisa> apparently one of the SHs (was it sah, or nara) says that
dynamis is too 'hectic'
[12:07] <Kisa> but fishing he does while he works on hw
[12:07] <Kisa> so.. been there a longass time
[12:07] <sumi> yeah
[12:07] <Kisa> aoki as well
[12:07] <sumi> well we have no reason to hold his spot
[12:07] <sumi> aoki is back in game
[12:07] <Kisa> but aoki is back..
[12:07] <Kisa> yeah so the question is
[12:07] <sumi> she was going to go to the last run
[12:08] <Kisa> what defines how long ppl can stay on the inactive list as a
'special case'?
[12:08] <sumi> but supposedly her account was robbed
[12:08] <sumi> i think in the excell we should keep data for everyone
[12:09] <sumi> i think we need another section at the bottom for "removed"
[12:09] <sumi> the current winning vote is 4 "unexcused" runs = inactive
[12:09] <sumi> 8 "unexcused" runs = removal
[12:09] <Kisa> sumi the section is there
[12:09] <Kisa> its just hidden
[12:09] <sumi> oh ok
[12:09] <Kisa> takes too long to scroll down to run totals if i dont hide it
[12:09] <sumi> ok np
[12:10] <Kisa> so thats my qn, when do i move inactive special case to n/a
list
[12:10] <sumi> so that's unexcused
[12:10] <Kisa> cos inactive (normal) is moved to n/a after 16 absences
[12:10] <sumi> if one of those ppl comes back before hitting the "removed"
list, they just go through the 1 run lot restriction
[12:10] <sumi> but
[12:10] <sumi> if they have excused runs in the mix, we'll double it
[12:10] <sumi> if someone hits 8 (in a row) excused or unexcused runs they
go inactive list
[12:11] <sumi> if someone hits 16 (in a row) excused or unexcused runs they
go removed list
[12:11] <Kisa> 2 run restriction!
[12:11] <sumi> removed list means if they come back they need to "reapp"
[12:11] <Kisa> hmmm even if its like aoki and ennei?
[12:12] <Kisa> or zara who is 'moving'
[12:12] <sumi> well there are always exceptions, ennei i don't really think
fits
[12:12] <sumi> aoki physically didn't have a ps2 to play for a couple months
[12:13] <sumi> and since we need DRG mains, i don't mind letting her back
[12:13] <sumi> no one to vote against her cept Diogy
[12:13] <sumi> i'm hesitant to kick zara since he has no reason to stay XD
[12:14] <sumi> but if we kick his chances of coming back for a different
job's AF, are zero
[12:14] <sumi> in my mind
[12:14] <sumi> i'm still unsure about what to do about Drzaus' post about
THF and MNK
[12:14] <sumi> i knew that's been coming for sooo long
[12:14] <sumi> i'm tempted to leave it to the new policy, MNK mainlot + SH
vote
[12:15] <sumi> if he is rejected he'll probably leave and ppl will flame him
[12:15] <Kisa> well... i dont think mnk is too highly contested
[12:15] <sumi> the piece he needs is needed by like 6 mnks
[12:15] <sumi> i think
[12:16] <Kisa> u should post about this in SH section
[12:16] <Kisa> see what the rest say
[12:16] <Kisa> zara talked to me and said he's interested in currency bla bla
[12:16] <Kisa> excuses bout internet connection n lag
[12:16] <sumi> >.>
[12:16] <sumi> i think i might just save time and paste this into SH section
[12:17] <sumi> so now is the time to wave to everyone and make fun of
sahearniitth
[12:17] <Kisa> HI CASKAA KISS PLZ
[12:17] * sumi waves to <everyone> and makes fun of sahearniitth
[12:17] <Kisa> SAHEARNIITTH IS A PERV
[12:17] <Kisa> NARA SUX
[12:17] <sumi> haha
[12:17] <Kisa> MUFFINS IS.. yknow, just there.
[12:17] <Kisa> k im done
[12:17] <sumi>
[12:19] <Kisa> sooo.. moving ennei out..
[12:19] <Kisa> should we even vote on this
[12:20] <sumi> no
[12:21] <sumi> i will live by this from now on
[12:21] <sumi> "I also agree with TT. I'm really tired of hearing people
"pregnant dogging" (lmao at the language filter on these boards) at others
for winning lots on AF. If we feel like there are attendance problems
within the shell (which I think there are some), then we should deal with
those attendance issues. If people are found to be selectively skipping,
they should be removed from the shell. Beyond that, distribution of AF
should be left to the lotting process. Like it or not, luck is a factor in
this game. Trying to remove it entirely is stupid, imo. It won't always
turn out fair, but I think a system like this would cause far more
problems than the luck factor does."
[12:22] <sumi> if someone has attendance problems period we'll act on it
[12:22] <sumi> i'm pretty sure aoki wants to come back to RB
[12:23] <sumi> she's only been in game for a week so far
[12:23] <sumi> and been dealing with her account being robbed
[12:23] <sumi> i'll leave aoki to the SH and diogy
[12:23] <sumi> ennei just remove
[12:23] <Kisa> hrmm..
[12:23] <sumi> since volrath is high profile we might wanna vote
[12:23] <Kisa> is it a double standard?
[12:23] <sumi> but with his record i lean towards plain removing
[12:23] <Kisa> well volrath has never been gone for 16 runs in a row
[12:24] <sumi> no it's not, if ennei wants to do dynamis again, he'll have
to reapp too
[12:24] <sumi> same with volrath
[12:24] <Kisa> nyu i meant aoki
[12:25] <sumi> everyone is welcome to reapp
[12:25] <sumi> right aoki will reapp, meaning SH + Diogy vote
[12:25] <Kisa> [01:21] <sumi> i'll leave aoki to the SH and diogy <-- means
i will move Aoki to N/A list for now ok?
[12:25] <Kisa> then vote, then reinstate if required
[12:25] <sumi> right
[12:29] <sumi> i'm tempted to say the top 36 will go to the first round of
the new zones
[12:29] <sumi> if ppl are found going with other shells in the meantime,
they will be removed as normal
[12:30] <sumi> and our population will eventually get down to 36
[12:30] <Kisa> haha
[12:30] <Kisa> well, throw it out as an idea i guess
[12:30] <Kisa> id like to say that maybe restricting low attendance ppl is a
little harsh
[12:31] <sumi> i was going to put that attending the new zones will not
affect your RB attendance whatsoever (those zones attendance will be
tracked seperately)
[12:31] <Kisa> so i was thinkin maybe like.. for 1 or 2 months they can try
new dynamis
[12:31] <Kisa> with other shells
[12:31] <Kisa> but it can only be when RB does these zones
[12:31] <Kisa> and it cant butt in with the week's second run timing
[12:32] <Kisa> not tough since all the NA LSes like to squeeze in on
wednesday -_-
[12:34] <sumi> well the top 36 thing isn't permanent
[12:34] <sumi> just a small "reward"
[12:35] <sumi> i don't see it as penalizing the lower attendance people,
though the ones screaming for high attendance rewards will probably see it
that way
[12:35] <Kisa> well...
[12:35] <Kisa> i mean like, if you were, say, #45
[12:36] <Kisa> and basically RB leaders telling you "no, you can't do new
areas w/ us, and no, you can't do new areas w/ anyone else"
[12:36] <Kisa> thats quite a slap in the face
[12:36] <Kisa> i would leave the LS if it were me
[12:36] <Kisa> i think its reasonable to say its ok *if* we are doing these
zones at that same time, sure, they can go join other ppl
[12:37] <Kisa> but only if it doesnt affect, say, our sunday run and them
being unable to attend it cos they have to wait 72hrs or what crap
[12:38] <Kisa> kisa.akubi.de/rustysheet.zip <-- new version w/ all ur
input... please lookie!
[12:41] <sumi> well the only other fair suggestion is first-come first-serve
[12:41] <sumi> problem with that is we dunno if we'll have the right job mix
in that group
[12:41] <sumi> where we can already see the attendance group
[12:42] <sumi> i see what you're saying kisa, that sounds ok to me
[12:42] <Kisa>
[12:42] <sumi> and after we've hit each new zone we should have come up with
an answer for the rest of the shell
[12:43] <sumi> i personally wouldn't mind a break from attendance
[12:43] <sumi> we could ask for ppl to volunteer their spots in the top 36
for later runs
[12:43] <sumi> and it would be a free break
[12:43] <sumi> anyway
[12:43] <sumi> i have to scoot
[12:44] <sumi> gotta drive an hour to a conference with my boss and one of
our clients
[12:44] <Kisa> kk scoot~ i will post the new spreadsheet up in a couple of
mins..
[12:44] <Kisa> or should i wait till tomorrow @.@
[12:44] <sumi> doing a new product demo for disaster recovery software
[12:44] <Kisa> oo o.o oki gl!
[12:44] <Kisa> see uuuu
[12:44] <sumi> you can wait til tomorrow
[12:44] <Kisa> okidoki
[12:44] <sumi> i'll post this for SH now XD
[12:44] <Kisa> k!
End of Kisa buffer Tue Dec 13 12:45:54 2005
