[Discuss] RE: Discuss Digest, Vol 18, Issue 12

[Timothy Collett]

On May 3, 2006, at 6:14 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote:

>> Other than that, every time I've seen someone get reprimended for not
>> following orders(which in itself is not a bad thing!) and they've
>> defended with an OOC message saying "Sorry, but I have a real life  
>> and
>> missed the order due to that" the issue has been dropped right  
>> there and
>> then.
>
> I've rarely seen anyone accused without first having checked the Last
> Seen time to check they got the order.  I think the Last Seen time
> *is* the solution to this problem and it's already there, which is why
> I rarely see the problem.

The problem is that the Last Seen time isn't useful enough.  I can't  
tell from looking at it if a person *did* log in in time to get a  
particular order, only if they logged in during a particular *day*,  
and what order they last logged in in.

When we had battlegroups, the BG leaders could, I seem to remember,  
see their subordinates' login times with far more granularity--how  
many hours it had been, I think.  If we could have something like  
that back, whether it were for the High Council, for the Marshals  
(who have replaced BG leaders), or whoever, that would be extremely  
useful.  It would allow us to be far more efficient, I think, in our  
order-giving.

However, if you do it for Marshals, please, please, please make  
Imperial Marshals work!!!  Otherwise we won't have that information  
on anyone not in a duchy...

Timothy Collett
Anaris Family

--

Claiming that the Macintosh is inferior to Windows because most  
people use Windows, is like saying that all other restaurants serve  
food that is inferior to McDonalds'.
--Randy B. Singer