Universal IC Turnaround Expectations

[Smithers]

We have an OOC understanding, specifically for RPA and staff requests, to allow 72 hours to hear back on something before giving it a bump just in case it got overlooked. This also comes with the expectation that we're all aware and reasonably patient that things will often take longer than anticipated due to RL, job backlog, etc. etc. For the most part I think this works out really well - everyone's on the same page about what to expect and how to respectfully follow up.

I'd like to see us adopt the same or similar policy for IC things as a way of normalizing reasonable turnaround times for things like letter writing, craft commissions, and so on. We've got something written up already for what to do if you're incarcerated, if you can't find a priest to marry you, etc. so I think expanding on it could really help cut down player frustration and miscommunications, if there's a universally accepted approach to checking the progress of ongoing activities.

The simplest way to get this information out there, I think, would be to create a helpfile explaining the community's guidelines and then to add a reference to it in other related helpfiles.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we should make it policy that nothing should take more than 72 hours to complete, or that characters shouldn't be able to set their own rules as far as how long they take to craft. It just helps us all remain respectful and considerate of other people's time while helping each other keep the game moving forward.

[galaxgal]

Staff requests are very serious and get a three day SLA. In this context, it is reasonable to ask that IC player requests, which are often far less serious and urgent, get a similar grace period before followup.

Basically, +1.

[Puciek]

Yes please, and just because someone is online that doesn't mean they will be responding to your matter right now. Sometimes person is simply not in the OOC mood to handle this particular problem, so don't get mad if it takes a day or two, even though that person was online. We all have those days.

[wimple]

I'd be hesitant to have player reaction be the same turn around time as handled by staff for major issues; I've certainly had periods where I can't play during the work week and can on the weekends, and that'd be longer than a 72 hour turn around. Additionally, mail isn't received automatically, there's a lag. Considering this suggestion is game wide, if something like this goes forward I think guidance needs to be closer to an OOC week than 72 hours. At that point, proper follow up may just be another IC attempt at contact and a pboard note. But it would need to be clear that this is for a response, not necessary receipt of whatever items are requested or a complete resolution of whatever the issue was.

I think this could run into issues though with people who are arrested, injured, kidnapped, or on the lam and otherwise unable to receive mail.

[galaxgal]

The post is not asking for a policy matter to expect all IC items to be resolved in 72 hours. It's asking for a community standard to give someone 72 hours before following up on letters/notes/etc as a matter of courtesy.

To reiterate Smithers' original post:

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we should make it policy that nothing should take more than 72 hours to complete, or that characters shouldn't be able to set their own rules as far as how long they take to craft.

[wimple]

I understand the purpose of the post. I was attempting to express that I did not feel that 72 hours was an appropriate window and that the window for the community standard for following up should be a week. My mention of making sure it's clear that the response did not indicate a resolution was an attempt to agree with what you quoted from the original post.

[Starstarfish]

While I agree with a general concept, I feel that a bit too quickly community standards particularly those noted in helpfiles become things people expect staff to enforce on others as policy even if that is against the expressed intent here. And/or people who don't follow them get labeled as 'bad RPers' (case in point super strong feelings about turn order despite that not actually being policy save very specific cases.) Overall, we seem to be on a forward path of wanting to turn RP preferences into regulations and rules, and I'm a bit torn on that.

[galaxgal]

As someone who doesn't always cleave to strict turn order and prefers when people reply to things more 'organically,' I feel you there, Star. I don't like that personal preferences are starting to be interpreted by players as policy and I've not been entirely a fan of how much people have been trying to side-step IC resolution to conflicts with these OOC preferences and 'standards' as of late.

In this case, though, a 'three day' community standard is as helpful for senders as it is receiver: having a common standard of what's 'polite' gives people an idea of how fast or how slow doing follow-ups is might be viewed as hurried or relaxed. This is especially great for 'low-power' players who might be nervous about doing that followup lest they be seen as a nag or a pest.

Conversely useful: if a player sends five letters in two days and the standard is three OOC days, we know that they're in a hurry for whatever (justified or unjustified) reason, and if we only see a followup from them, say, a week or so or never, then the standard helps convey that frequency of communication as more 'leisurely'.

EDIT: Basically, Without the standard, players A,B, and C with differing playschedules and styles might all form differing opinions of whether a wait has been ICly 'long' or 'short'.

(And the IC timescale doesn't help us here - Some things in Lithmore happen faster or slower than they would in real life, either due to the limitations of being in a MUD and/or differences in historically-flavored infrastructure.)

[Puciek]

Maybe better way to phrase it is not as a standard but another entry in help rp culture