Go back to previous topic
Forum Name The Battlefield
Topic subjectVaccation, gone for 4 days.
Topic URLhttps://forums.carrionfields.com/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=84948
84948, Vaccation, gone for 4 days.
Posted by Arrna Holdfast on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
I'll be back in 4 days. See you around!
85033, For those that haven't noticed... I'm back. ;) n/t
Posted by Arrna on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
n/t
84964, Seriously
Posted by Daurwyn on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
You don't need to post about a 4 day absence!

People are away for longer than that all the time! If someone can't wait a week to speak with you, then they don't deserve to speak with you.
84967, She's just being nice, that's all. I appreciate it considering she's a leader. nt
Posted by Merothmos on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
nt
84968, Agreed. n/t
Posted by Catastrophic on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
.
84980, Where do you draw the line?
Posted by incognito on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Should leaders be twittering what they are up to in real life, so you know that they won't be logging on for a few hours?
84984, You took what I said and then decided to throw extremes around.
Posted by Merothmos on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Of course Arrna wouldn't be twittering her status on the Battlefield every 30-60 minutes. I simply said that I personally appreciate knowing when she'll be "AFK-Real Life" for more than a couple days.
84987, I'm trying to illustrate a point
Posted by Daurwyn2 on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Which is that there's some point whereby updates become too much.

You apparently feel that it is a couple of days. My point was simply that there is a line to be drawn somewhere, unless you feel that twittering is ok.
85004, I think three to four days absence would be a good minimum for reporting absence
Posted by DurNominator on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
However, I think that you less than three day absences should not be reported. I think that it depends on the character activity. I feel that leaders and Imms who choose to do so should be the only people to make such reports.
84971, Bleh
Posted by Valkenarr on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
>You don't need to post about a 4 day absence!
>
>People are away for longer than that all the time! If someone
>can't wait a week to speak with you, then they don't deserve
>to speak with you.

If I know the leader may not be around for 4 days, I may also not play for four days. Sometimes my goal is to get into a cabal and I don't want to end up heroing in those 4 days and having them be like "why did you come to us so late?" Because "Uh well you weren't around when I was levelling" And yeah I could just level sit and pk or something but meh, I haven't learned to enjoy the sub-hero ranks yet.
84978, I stand by my point
Posted by incognito on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
If you are selectively logging in based on others' playing times, you don't deserve to be in a cabal.
84982, You're being a little overdramatic..
Posted by Java on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Are you saying you've never adjusted your play times so that you could be logged in when your chosen Imm, or cabal leader was?

That's all he's saying he wants to do. But if the cabal leader is going to be inactive for the better part of the week, he can save himself that particular frustration.
84983, Damn. I'm agreeing with Java. Damn. nt
Posted by Stunna1 on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
asdf
84985, I agree with java sometimes, but I think incognito is calling it right.
Posted by minyar1 on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Maybe the original poster should clarify. I take it to mean they aren't going to play at all for those four days because the leader isn't around. I agree that this is kinda crappy and means they probably have some other character that they might play instead which isn't all that great either. Just my thoughts. I do agree that adjusting your schedule so you can be around to see said Imm or Leader is fine, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't play if they aren't around.
84989, Daurwyn's right.
Posted by WarEagle2 on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Four days is okay to just take the hiatus.

I'm not sure why anyone wants to argue that, I think it's just for the sake of arguing.