bigbadron:
quote:
just checking in doesn't tell anyone if the player is planning on writing a response post or just cooling their heels waiting for someone else to post.
Just clicking on their name at the top of the thread doesn't really tell you whether they're planning to post or just cooling their heels either. Or even if they've bothered to scroll down to read the latest posts. It just tells you that they were in the game (which is what the Cast List does).
I might not have been as clear as I meant. It isn't about tracking sign-ins. I've had (have) a problem with some players trying to push things forward before everyone else is ready just because they see that the cast lists says the person has logged in that day so they assumed no post meant no input.
Clicking "Move on?" would be the player stating that they are ready to move on without having to making the kinds of one-word posts Johnny was referring to or the nudging PMs I was referring to. The cast list says someone has checked in to the game at some point in that day, yeah, but this would be specific to the thread it's in, not the game in general. It's meant to facilitate play, not keep a log of who's online at the moment (someone could check in long enough to mark the box and then go on about their day--it doesn't say what time they marked the box or if they're currently online). And it kinda
would mean that they aren't typing a post, or they wouldn't check it and they'd be typing the post instead. Knowing that someone has had the chance to give input before
Someone posting in the thread clearing the checks would actually make sense since one would expect the other players to go read the new post before agreeing to move on again. That post might have changed events so that someone wants to respond before moving on.
I'm not married to the idea, but I do think it would be useful in the games I run and play in. If it's too cumbersome to execute or unpopular I can leave it be. I'll just keep knocking my players about the head with PMs and rMails. :)