Organization level acceptance

[Petrow]

Nobody likes posting in some archives and feeling obligated to do so just so his virtual gang or whatever it is gets bigger. It is more like a job than pleasure and this is a game we should be having fun before everything. I suggest you make it like before, no medias no shit. There were medias, butt you didnt have to post so much maybe 10 post a year will do it as its not fun at all...soo make the acceptance based on in game activity, attitude w/e else but the thing with medias is really boring.

[Cruz.]

Ur media represents how active you are ingame and how much activities you do there.

For an example, u can have a gang with 5 afk's all day without any kind of activities being done. How can admins or staff check that a gang is actually doing something without being there 24/7 ?

[Kybali0n]

new shit: YEYE, dont post simple post then edit post like picasso, or like vasili kandisky, or like piet modrian, put photoshop, illustrator and corel draw cuz simple post wont give u points for active gang, i wil check ur media and not game, if ur media is empty, warning

[Spetnazz]

There must be a more effective way to measure activity. It's a pain in the ass for the squads/gangs and it must suck for the GMs as well. Who gives a shit about TT's 48 SR-screenshots with 4 members using /wave. I'm all for re-thinking it.

[Teddy]

Yes and no; I don't enjoy it, but be careful what you wish for. With no media posts requirements, levels are based more on opinions than facts, so whether you get accepted or not; or demoted or not, will largely depend on whether the GMs are your friends, or not. Worse if they're your enemies. Like it was in the past.

I don't know what the requirements are though, since they're 'hidden', however, ThC posts almost exclusively turfs and our own bankrobs (occasionally roleplays or br assists) daily or every 2 or 3 days - if this wasn't enough then I would agree it's too much, but considering no complaints from GMs I see it as fine. Some gangs like C and X and TT like to race for most media posts, others don't, meh.

As long as an active gang doesn't get warned, or an active gang doesn't get denied an acceptance because of medias, its fine. There was a time a few months ago where AA got warned for their media archive which was very stupid because they were also the most active gang at the same time (over RPs, I think?) but looks like things have improved, or idk.

Main point is, you wouldn't like a opinion-based system when you find out the new GM is someone who doesn't like you very much (AA 2017), or someone who prefers certain gangs like their own even if they don't do that much (cough 2016 SoA), because you're gonna end up harassed any way. There should be a visible balance as to what the requirements are.

I don't think gangs should be compared because gangs like C raise the average for everyone else with their 600 posts a month, for example. That's definitely a change that needs to be made. The 'as an average of level 5 gangs' thing needs to go.

[Laza]

Yes and no. Actually players has decreased, most of them left just because of real life reasons because they doesn't have enough time for game or so. So far I think the only one thing which should be changed, that's cutting the time from 1 year to 6 months in order to get the squad/gang on the top. It takes lots of time, but nowadays, people loses interest and closes up their organisation faster. Don't take it offensive or such, that's just my personal opinion.

[Jasper]

It would be cool if the GM's had access to an in-game panel where they can just see all activity logs done by a certain gang, just like the gangs can currently see through /gang > logs. Remove all unneccessary logs like invites / warnings, and make them only see bankrob and turfing logs. This would mean posting bankrobs and turfing on the forums is no longer a must. Only activities which should still be posted are roleplays and events, unless some way the Devs can implent a future of tracking those in-game as well.

Other than that, I understand your frustration but I have to agree with what teddy said above.

[Sneijder]

Well there is a way to make this idea work, not fully but up to a limit. If there is chance to keep count of turf zones taken by a gang and the amount of SRs done with at least 3 members of a gang with a script, then the media archives would get less messy for sure. I believe keeping count of trainings, BR assists, roleplays and events with a script is not possible, so gangs would still have to post those types of activity on forum. But the point is, without turf and SR posts, media archives would look more clean and there would be less ''job'' to do for gang members.
Edit: Oh and there is a script that keeps count of BRs already as far as I know, so BR posts wouldn't be needed as well.

[Patrol]

If a GM bases his opinion on friendships (teddys statement) and basically if he likes u or not, he should not even be GM. Thats a first

but yes i agree with the teddybear

[Daryl]

@Teddy said in Organization level acceptance:

Yes and no; I don't enjoy it, but be careful what you wish for. With no media posts requirements, levels are based more on opinions than facts, so whether you get accepted or not; or demoted or not, will largely depend on whether the GMs are your friends, or not. Worse if they're your enemies. Like it was in the past.

I strongly support this sentiment and anyone who is a HQ of an official group will know with the activity check, it's something myself and Jay very clearly laid out. We'd rather do the activity checks but if the majority of groups agreed they do not want to do it, that is fine but it would be entirely our personal opinion and you would not have grounds to argue.

The GM system as it is now is flawed, everyone knows this - there are things like adminjails which are extremely flawed in the way they are calculated. There is no maximum amount you can get because it changes every month and that maximum figure is the same for everyone, irrespective of organisation size. This is a flawed part of the current system but I digress.

The media is fairly bang on in terms of being immune to personal opinion. It's the same for active members counts.

I prefer the GM team operating based on numbers and statistics (even if often misused or mis-attributed) as opposed to working purely on gut instinct. That only got us trouble in the past and often an organisation could go from being viewed as positive to negative in the swing of a month due to a change of personnel in GM.

[Liyones_]

Hell no and as Cruz said

Ur media represents how active you are ingame and how much activities you do there.

+1

[Faysal]

As much as I like to say yes but it's surely a no. As we all know media archieves are made for a reason so GMs can check and see how people actually work hard for the spawn and try to achieve the requirements for it and maybe care about the quality of each post especially roleplays.
If we deal with things just the way you said it, it will be a mess since there are no specific requirements or anything that can actually set limits whethever you have to accpet that gang/squad or refuse each level.

Yes that's game, yes we should enjoy our time, have fun and not feel obliged to post or you'll be kicked warned bla bla.. But technically starting with this won't work properly since SAES was using media archieve since it's beginning.

But yeah, dealing with numbers of screenshots for some daily activities that people do just because they want to is a bit dumb (BRs, Turfs..)