Reset Password
Existing players used to logging in with their character name and moo password must signup for a website account.
- Emily 3m I lost myself, in the dark charade.
a Mench 17m Doing a bit of everything.
- JMo 23m All death is certain.
- zxq 38s
- F9DFCQ 20m
- NightHollow 54m
- mercuri 20s
- Napoleon 38m
- Bruhlicious 6h Deine Mutter stinkt nach Erbrochenem und Bier.
- SacredWest 4h
And 24 more hiding and/or disguised
Sindomedome logo
a cyberpunk roleplaying game
banner art by Grand Failure
Connect to Sindome @ moo.sindome.org:5555 or just Play Now

Auto DC Idlers

Login to post. Membership required.
Jump To
Newest Post
Recently on a Sunday 10/19 players were idle over 30 minutes. Three known were still on SIC(unresponsive), several had been idle an hour or more. I propose an auto disconnect be added to DC players that have gone idle for over a certain amount of time. I know sometimes things happen out of your control. But, there are many chronic idlers as well.
By Mythologique at Jan 9, 2015 8:43 AM
4.D. Idling

Due to the way the MOO handles experience, use of any system to keep your

character connected to the MOO in your absence is not allowed. Characters

are permitted to idle 24 hours before being disconnected from the

game. Bypassing this disconnect timer in any way to stay connected in your

absence will result in us breaking your connection and preventing

auto-reconnection. Your character will remain unmoved after disconnect and

you are solely responsible for any IC consequences of where your character

ends up 'sleeping'.

By etc at Jan 9, 2015 8:45 AM
The system was changed from an hour idle disconnect to 24 hrs a while back to my understanding. I don't see a reason to go back to that.

I'm not sure what the issue is really, care to elaborate?

By Cerberus at Jan 9, 2015 8:45 AM
When players are connected to the game, they're considered IC at all times, as far as I was aware. When there are others out looking for roleplay, it's misleading to check to see how many are connected, but none of them are actually available for interaction of any kind. Maybe that's the point she's trying to make; it's not fair to players who log in looking to, you know, roleplay but chronic idlers are just idling when they're nowhere around for RP.
By Napoleon at Jan 9, 2015 8:47 AM
More people on the @who is beneficial to new players logging in and seeing how many players the game has. So the pro's and con's kinda balance each other out here.

We all want new players to stick around, and low player count on @who is the easiest way to chase them off so let's avoid that first and foremost. :-)

By Cerberus at Jan 9, 2015 8:50 AM
Idlers should just switch to the ooc zone. That's what it is there for.
By Kuzco at Jan 9, 2015 8:51 AM
It's also counterproductive to have X amount of players logged in, but Y amount actually available to interact with a new player, too.
By Napoleon at Jan 9, 2015 8:52 AM
We've discussed having idle people perhaps drop off the SIC who. They would still be 'reachable' via SIC, but we would treat the WHO as like, an 'active' list.

This would actually make more sense ICly since typing 'who' would yield 65 million results.

Thoughts?

By Slither at Jan 9, 2015 8:52 AM
Just because someone is idle does not mean they are not there, or not ready to respond to IC events.

Idlers aren't hurting you.

By etc at Jan 9, 2015 8:52 AM
That's actually a really smart alternative, Slither. I'm down for it.
By Napoleon at Jan 9, 2015 8:53 AM
Yes please! And perhaps a complementary system that lets you SIC asleep people, so you can't really tell whether someone's asleep or out and about, since ICly you're not always asleep when you're logged off?
By SoulTune at Jan 9, 2015 8:53 AM
Slither's idea is a good middle ground. It is true, etc, that for example I sometimes sit down to watch SIC chatter without inputting any commands. But just dropping of the Who list is a good step, IMHO.
By Kuzco at Jan 9, 2015 8:54 AM
Sleep SICing is a topic for the ideas forum.
By Slither at Jan 9, 2015 8:54 AM
Or...so that the list doesn't become smaller, have those idled out over a certain number of hours go to anonymous status instead, Slither?

And, to play devil's advocate, since the original poster was discussing lack of RP from idlers...it can still be said that even those active on WHO are not available for RP because they are idling in one closed off location but simply doing minimal things to prevent being seen as idle. In effect, not being idle doesn't mean producing quality RP.

I don't really think of SIC activity as RP normally. Of course there are exceptions *shrugs*

By Jade1202 at Jan 9, 2015 8:57 AM
SIC activity is, to a lesser extent, roleplay. It's conversation that your character and others are involved in ICly and establishes connections between one another if you can't be face-to-face or are idling, but still want to talk to them.
By Napoleon at Jan 9, 2015 9:01 AM
I agree with etc's last post. A lack of activity doesn't necessarily mean that the player isn't ready to react to any RP thrown their way.
By Mute at Jan 9, 2015 9:02 AM
I suppose I didn't clarify well enough. I'm talking about those idle and unresponsive.

I like Slither's idea. I understand Cerberus's point as well.

What if, instead of dropping off SIC (and making SIC who look inactive), the aliases of idlers randomized to either another alias or made to appear as a newbie alias with no tagline? Then, when they stop idling, their alias comes back to normal.

By Mythologique at Jan 9, 2015 9:10 AM
'What if, instead of dropping off SIC (and making SIC who look inactive), the aliases of idlers randomized to either another alias or made to appear as a newbie alias with no tagline? Then, when they stop idling, their alias comes back to normal.'

Seems like needless overhead, especially since the game would have to hold the old alias.

But then again, idles dropping off SIC seems like a fairly iffy feature regardless. If for any reason I have to idle, if I'm still logged in, that means I'm prepared to respond to RP; therefore, I want to be available on 'who'.

By Euclid at Jan 9, 2015 9:14 AM
Whether you consider SIC activity roleplaying or not, it's THE IC way to get roleplaying going.

Some idlers are waiting for it. Ping them.

This is a "quality of life" thread. Someone's ICly ignoring your character's SICs and you're annoyed as a player.

I don't like this idea because you shouldn't be able to tell if they're ignoring you for IC or OOC reasons. It's all IC, and you're free to ICly react to the snub, no matter whether it was deliberate or not.

By bean_dip at Jan 9, 2015 9:16 AM
Exactly.
By Mute at Jan 9, 2015 9:17 AM
If this issue is that people show up on SIC but don't respond to SIC messages, maybe instead just respond to those people IC with it later. Accuse them of ignoring you or get upset that they 'blew you off' rather than try and set up code to handle the situation. (no flippancy at all in this comment, just a thought I had reading over these)
By Jade1202 at Jan 9, 2015 9:17 AM
I understand the points people are making that, just because they are idle doesn't mean they aren't ready to RP. But...you're not contributing to proactively creating RP in that case either. You're just waiting to react to what someone else provides. I also anticipate people saying, I'm waiting for someone to login to continue an RP.

Am I the only one who RPs even when I'm alone?

By Mythologique at Jan 9, 2015 9:20 AM
We can't do Slither's idea, as it will strongly support correlation between @who and who. sorry.
By Johnny at Jan 9, 2015 9:21 AM
Creating RP others can react to is good. If this is you, you're awesome.

Policing other players for something that amounts to a trivial personal OOC annoyance is bad. If this is you, don't make it your business.

By bean_dip at Jan 9, 2015 9:23 AM
This isn't always SIC. You can be in the same room with someone that goes idle, causing a sudden freeze in RP as well. I see my way isn't the way to solve it. Maybe we could just launch them into the OOC lounge after an hour or something.
By Mythologique at Jan 9, 2015 9:24 AM
"Am I the only one who RPs even when I'm alone?"

You're not, and this kind of holier than thou discussion isn't going to be a very productive avenue of discourse to travel down.

There are numerous OOC reasons a player may have to go idle but still wishes to remain connected to the game. Even the most active, content-driving players may not be 'contributing' in the manner you wish 100% of their time connected.

This is turning into a gripe about other players more-so than discussion of a proposed feature.

By Euclid at Jan 9, 2015 9:25 AM
"You can be in the same room with someone that goes idle, causing a sudden freeze in RP as well."

Well that's totally different from not liking what you see when you @who.

"launch them into the OOC lounge after an hour"

Anyway, this is a bad idea too. Where is this unresponsive character? Where do they go when they un-idle and come back out of @ooc? Someplace they shouldn't be, if the players who they went AFK on can't stick around?

By bean_dip at Jan 9, 2015 9:29 AM
The above method wouldn't work for the same reasons as Johnny stated.
By Euclid at Jan 9, 2015 9:30 AM
Social pressure.

IC and OOC social pressure.

By Linekin at Jan 9, 2015 9:31 AM
It's not meant to be a gripe or a whatever whatever. It's on the idea board, it was an idea, not some intentional attack on people's play style as idlers. Really, you all don't like the idea, fine. It's something I've dealt with when trying to RP in person. Not just over SIC. I didn't realize this wasn't an issue for others or would be such a conflictual idea.
By Mythologique at Jan 9, 2015 9:32 AM
The last time someone was unable to respond in a timely manner IC, I politely suggested that they drop into the OOC lounge and they did. Sometimes all you have to do is ask.
By etc at Jan 9, 2015 9:33 AM
Discussion is good, guise, I don't think we should start throwing personal attacks around when people get on the bboard.

What do you do when your RP depends on a person who idle a lot and starts becoming less and less active? Do you soldier on, acting like they're there in your character's life anyway? Do you try to snake out of the IC relationship for OOC or related IC reasons?

By SoulTune at Jan 9, 2015 9:34 AM
"What do you do when your RP depends on a person who idle a lot and starts becoming less and less active? Do you soldier on, acting like they're there in your character's life anyway? Do you try to snake out of the IC relationship for OOC or related IC reasons?"

If somebody is becoming less and less active, it's (I think, varies on a character to character basis) simple to say you're simply moving on.

If somebody is becoming less and less active in the sense that when you're RPing with them they're frequently dropping idle, to the point where you might be waiting ten minutes a time for a response when in a public location, you could reasonably spin that IC as them seeming more detached and distant and react IC appropriately.

By Euclid at Jan 9, 2015 9:37 AM
If the AFK character is in a place they would ICly be uninvited from instead of allowed to sleep there or be there while you sleep, like let's say your personal apartment or a secure area in a workplace, and it's time for you to @quit and you don't ICly or OOCly want the unresponsive player there place and you aren't physically capable of moving them out of there, you can xhelp for the situation to be resolved that way and for the other player to be made aware that that AFK in that situation isn't cool. Same goes for if they actually do @ooc in that situation and you OOCly can't have their host/chaperone (your character) stick around for them to come back.
By Linekin at Jan 9, 2015 9:40 AM
The above should not be taken by players who idle as permission to do this! It's an extreme measure, and it's meta and not IC, and you will be lectured or worse if you make admins do this.
By Linekin at Jan 9, 2015 9:41 AM
(long post ahead)

bean_dip wrote:

I don't like this idea because you shouldn't be able to tell if they're ignoring you for IC or OOC reasons. It's all IC, and you're free to ICly react to the snub, no matter whether it was deliberate or not.

--

I agree. The correlation between IC and OOC shouldn't be seen and since it is all IC, react appropriately IC'ly.

--

Show concern for the person who's spacing out because the character has been up since five in the morning. Or seems to have a lot on their mind. Consistently not getting sleep is unhealthy / can create problems and mistakes. Bring it up. (We show concern for or are critical of taller people who weigh 95 - 100 pounds, do the same for some who space out.) It's IC. So, rip into the character IC'ly. Or show concern where it's happening frequently (especially if it's happening in public - there are thieves about and people who enjoy fondling others ;) ) or smack them upside the head. Maybe outright ask them if they're not right in the head or did their mother drop them when they were a kid. There are a variety of things you can do IC'ly about this.

Now, sometimes people have an little emergency to handle [kid / dog / spills / lag / etc.] and that's understandable that you have to rush to handle it and can't go to the ooc lounge.

I understand where Myth is coming from and have been on both sides before. For the most part this isn't a problem in this game / community, but how about some RP manners and if busy in RL where it's going to take some time (work, cleaning, etc), don't log in and if tired, maybe going to fall asleep (if you catch yourself [I know a player who RP'd that wonderfully the next day when this happened]), log out in safe area? (Just a thought.)

By thecraftydragon at Jan 10, 2015 5:47 PM
Jump To Oldest Post