litphoria

What's the difference between “online” and “active”? And why is “active” better?

Oh, and why doesn't “online matter”?

I see. But at the same time, “active” does not necessarily mean they're “online” right now either. You personally may like to see that 10 people are active (so have done something in the past hour or so). A lot of “chat-type” of people, those who strictly want to roleplay live in real-time and not by Notes or forum messages, don't just want “active” people, they want people who are....“Online Now”, exactly as I said.

Moreover, if you read my OP carefully, paying attention to the wording, you'll see that your preference is already covered, because the status I'm suggesting, “Online Now”, is not to be given to a user unless...“[they have] recently posted in the Roleplay or recently clicked the CONNECT TO ROLEPLAY SESSION button.”

Furthermore, my suggestion is not for a general or homepage; it is for every individual Roleplay page, to copy and paste what I wrote in my OP: “at the top right corner of every Roleplay”.

Finally, “active” is already kind of covered on the site but using the term “recent”.

I could've mentioned this right away, but I was curious whether there was something linguistically better about the term “active” than the term “online”, and at this point, I see that the term “Online Now” is more relevant and beneficial to general users, especially the scores of people attracted to anything “chat”.

So I say that I already mentioned that “Online Now” would only be given to a user who “has recently posted in the Roleplay or recently clicked the CONNECT TO ROLEPLAY SESSION button”, and you say that's, “no more reliable than any other online status”, but “‘recently active’ search will only pop me up if I've actually done some action in the past 15 minutes”; and this is supposed to be a different suggestion?

I did try to be diplomatic already, but at this point, I can only say, I'm amazed!

It obviously has nothing to do with “recently active search”, because, as I mentioned a couple of times, this is for each individual Roleplay, each individual story. If said Roleplay is open for public viewing, then someone “reading” it, even if not even a member yet, can see that one, two, four, or zero players are “Online Now” in a column or box at the top right corner of the Roleplay's page, that this is not an “active” Roleplay, but a live roleplay running right now if there is one or two players Online connected to it. My idea is not focused on players or users, it is focused on Roleplays and highlighting whether any Roleplay is live (with Online Now players) or not.

As for how short or long the last action can be, that's a step after some people agree that this is a good idea and they endorse it (hopefully!). Whether the person has to be typing to be considered “Online Now” on one end of the extreme, or has posted something or clicked Connect within the last 15 min on the other end, or somewhere in-between, this can be discussed after the general idea is accepted and supported.

As for general “active” users, not specific to a Roleplay, which is the different issue you're talking about, it can either be an enhancement or a re-labeling for the already existing “recent” label.

No, it's not there; my suggestion is not there. There is no “column / box at the top right corner of every Roleplay, of the heading Online Now, showing the players connected to the Roleplay”.

There is an “involved characters” section a bit down the page, which lists all the characters who ever posted on the Roleplay, but which would change behavior and only list “connected” players as soon as a player connects. All that doesn't “talk to” chat-seeking people; it doesn't speak their language; moreover, it doesn't have the same functionality or representation I described.

There is an “involved characters” section a bit down the page, which lists all the characters who ever posted on the Roleplay, but which would change behavior and only list “connected” players as soon as a player connects. All that doesn't “talk to” chat-seeking people; it doesn't speak their language; moreover, it doesn't have the same functionality or representation I described.

This is inaccurate. For chat, it lists everyone who has a post in the current backlog. For active chats, this will be the kind of activity that matters --- these are the people you know are actually posting, have actually posted, and will likely post again. When you connect, this list then filters down to the people who are connected to the chat at the same time --- again, the activity that matters.

The site does not present non-contributing stalkers, and this is not likely to change. I might add a total count somewhere, but it will not link to the people who are not contributing to the chat or roleplay.

One of the important parts of the site is that being online doesn't matter. I'm aware chat people have their prejudices, but chat people are not the only people who use this site. The current behavior suits everyone and presents useful information to everyone.

I was not referring to “Chats”, Avent; I am referring to Roleplays, ones that have not been converted to a “Chat”, in Litphoria's context. So in a non-chat Roleplay, the behavior you quoted is exactly what I experience and see as a user, thus accurate as far as I can see. You were talking about Chats here, which lose some of the oldest backlogs (something I do not want to happen for my stories / Roleplays); but can you confirm that what I described is indeed inaccurate with relation to Roleplays too?

"converted to a chat"? PM, "standard", and chat all use the same systems. Anything that impacts one necessarily impacts all of them, as they share almost all of their code. "chats" just have a little change in presentation to make it more palatable to people who are used to IRC-style chats.

And if this is not for chats, I'm even more confused what you want out of this. Why are you talking about what matters to chat people when we're no longer talking about a chat?

The site does not present non-contributing stalkers, and this is not likely to change.

I don't know why you mentioned that; my suggestion clearly says that people “qualified” for the suggested “Online Now” label must have either: 1. Recently posted in the current Rolepay, or 2. Recently click the “CONNECT” button. If you're just adding extra information to the thread for clarification, that's fine; but there is no relevance between the above statement and my suggestion, and the thread has already been bloated with irrelevant counter-arguments as it is, that the simple spirit of the very specfici and clear suggestion I started with, I fear, is about to be buried in a mountain of misunderstanding.

One of the important parts of the site is that being online doesn't matter. I'm aware chat people have their prejudices, but chat people are not the only people who use this site. The current behavior suits everyone and presents useful information to everyone.

You're reading the word “online” with a laser-focussed understanding, your understanding of the word “online”, which carries its own prejudices, too, to borrow your word. My point is...if you keep doing everything, especially then underlying code and actual functionality, exactly as you've always done it, but simply call it with a different name, change the label used for it, and this potentially proves to indeed attract more visitors and members to the site...what have you lost? Or what's the huge reason for resistance against the change?

You say you want feedback; you want to the site to grow. Well, that's exactly what I’m trying to do. You're a certain type of person, surrounded by your compatible friends and contacts and RP partners; so you will get a specific type of feedback from that specific type of people. Do you want different feedback from people you don't normally talk to? Maybe even look down upon? Well, here it is, Avent...people I talked to, who come take a look here, immediately say things like “[they] prefer to roleplay by chat rather than forums or Notes”; and it's not easy explaining to them that Litphoria is actually both at the same time when Litphoria is using specfic terminology that contradicts the possibilities we claim exist, and, at the same time, Litphoria asserts that it is “useful to everyone”, but...doesn't show it, because it is talking to a clique.

And if this is not for chats, I'm even more confused what you want out of this. Why are you talking about what matters to chat people when we're no longer talking about a chat?

We're talking about the Roleplays, which can easily and seamlessly be either “live“, in “real-time”, from a perspective of functionality, just like what (drum roll, please)...just like something that some inferior people out there call “chat” because they don't know better; regardless, Litphoria non-chat Roleplays are capable of emulating the real-time, live quality of conventional chat, or being like the average forum thread. If that's the reality and functionality, why wouldn't these brilliant, multi-faceted, dual-functional Roleplays keep everything as it, apply the same rules to “active” or “recent” players, but instead of exclusively calling them “active” or “recent”, dedicating a small column or box at the top right of every Roleplay and changing the label from “active / recent” to “Online Now”, an aesthetic or linguistic change in one spot, while everything behind the curtains remains the same? Why talk to one group of people and not talk to or use another group that would make a great addition to the community?

That's my point. And if it still doesn't make sense, I'm not bothered at all. The only selfish beneft I'd get from this is a larger pool of roleplayers to choose from, but I don't have to insist on getting this from one place. This is mainly about sharing feedback that perhaps you won't hear from anyone else.

Woah, let's calm down now. I encourage feedback, but I also encourage users interested in the site to provide their feedback on the feedback. That creates the best possible combination of ideas for a particular feature. You also wouldn't want me implementing something if I don't really know the how or why behind it - it's not in the best interest of the feature.

So some conversation is bound to happen, and we shouldn't get too riled up about it! I don't think either Jack or I just have a real good grasp on what this is supposed to change. I made an assumption based on the multitude of other feedback I've made, and apparently it wasn't accurate, so I'm even more confused about what you want out of this now.

So.

1. What is the value of dedicating this list to a spot on the UI, when it is only relevant to a certain subset of users? Why is the current behavior of the list evolving as you make actions not the appropriate solution to you? Do you find it confusing or distracting?

2. Why do you like 'online now' instead of the current term? I don't really care too much about what we call the list one way or another, but you seem to, so what does online now communicate to you that involved (in this session) doesn't?

So far as I understand it now, this exactly describes something that already exists though, except for with much stricter parameters all the time. The only change in it would be that it's moved higher, maybe?

No, Harkness, again, not in Litphoria Chats, but in Litphoria Roleplays the addition I keep detailing does not exist. I already tried to explain this above when I wrote:

No, it's not there; my suggestion is not there. There is no “column / box at the top right corner of every Roleplay [NOT Chat!], [with] the heading Online Now, showing the players connected to the Roleplay”.

There is an “involved characters” section a bit down the page, which lists all the characters who ever posted on the Roleplay, but which would change behavior and only list “connected” players as soon as a player connects. All that doesn't “talk to” chat-seeking people; it doesn't speak their language; moreover, it doesn't have the same functionality or representation I described.

And this is happening in spite of of the fact that Litphoria Roleplays need not be changed to Litphoria Chats in order to function almost exactly as a conventional chat functions. Litphoria Roleplays even shows the message “[user] is typing...” when a player is! We're in a Litphoria Roleplay, not a Litphoria Chat, but if that isn't chat functionality, I don't know what would be!

And duplication is not a problem if the terminology and aestheic look is changed. On websites, you may have a graphical navigation bar at the top with embossed buttons, and an exact duplicate of that at the very bottom, but as text links to the various sections of a website. Similarly, you can have a section somewhere showing “active / recent” roleplayers in the current Roleplay we're looking at, displayed the way things are now—just as is; and a little column or box at the top right (subtly emulating the “this channel's userlist” look), with a heading for the column / box like “Online” or “Online Now” or “Online Characters” or “Online Roleplayers”, showing only the users / profiles that meet the “recent / active” requirements, so simply meet one of two simple requirements: 1. Posted in this Roleplay within the past 15 min, or 2. Clicked on CONNECT within the past 15 min.

1 What is the value of dedicating this list to a spot on the UI, when it is only relevant to a certain subset of users? Why is the current behavior of the list evolving as you make actions not the appropriate solution to you? Do you find it confusing or distracting?

The value is attracting new users from that subset to join, and, speaking their language afterwards, thus making them feel “at home” and keeping them.

The current behavior is appropriate for me personally, because I understand it; I already understand Litphoria enough for my personal use and wants. With that said, the current behavior is not that effective (which is the word I'd use) with certain users because it does not speak their language, thus confuses them, and, in turn, sends them away from the site at first glance.

So it is neither confusing nor distracting for me, but it is probably confusing for a certain type of potential user, or at least...misleading and gives them a limited understanding of the possibilities on “this sexy story or roleplay” they were sent to or found while curiously browsing.

2 Why do you like 'online now' instead of the current term? I don't really care too much about what we call the list one way or another, but you seem to, so what does online now communicate to you that involved (in this session) doesn't?

I personally don't like “Online Now” instead of anything else; as soon as I understand the “meaning” of what's in front of me, the “label” that someone gives it can be irrelevant to me. I simply understand to an acceptable degree, from a marketing and NLP perspective, how to speak someone's language; how to clarify a concept to someone or even make them feel that it is an expression of part of their identity, simply by using the words that make sense to that person / client / user / consumer, etc. And based on this, I know that a box or column that emulates the “userlist” look, and has a label like “Online Now” excites and motivates a certain type of user of your service.

For that type of user (not me), instead of “involved (in this session)”, “Online Now” communicates to them that: These people are not part of or involved in this story or roleplay, period; no, these characters are right here on this page, right now, and they're doing this thing, roleplaying, right this moment; “I can potentially join these people right now if I feel that I have a place in this story and quickly create a convincing profile”. “I can possibly ‘chat’ with these guys now if I sign up!” “Hey, these guys are around now, together...they weren't just here an hour ago or something. There aren't just ‘active’ people here, but quite a bunch of them simultaneously online.” To use an MMO analogy, to that user, it's a difference between “Uber MMO has 5 million active users!” and “When I entered the human capital in Uber MMO, I saw like hundreds of people around; it was awesome!”

The value is attracting new users from that subset to join, and, speaking their language afterwards, thus making them feel “at home” and keeping them.

This sounds dangerously like an assumption - or even a stereotype. I'm pretty sure chat users can understand the concept of "this list shows everyone who has posted, and when you connect it shows you everyone who is also connected". I don't necessarily agree that chat users would need to be coddled like this to feel "at home", since, if we're honest, they're going to spend most of the time in a chat here. And chats here, as you've said, aren't the subject of this suggestion.

So it is neither confusing nor distracting for me, but it is probably confusing for a certain type of potential user, or at least...misleading and gives them a limited understanding of the possibilities on “this sexy story or roleplay” they were sent to or found while curiously browsing.

So this is nothing which you would personally benefit from, but you think someone else, who is not in this thread, might? Might you know anyone who might be able to contribute to this conversation to offer more insight?

With that said, if what I collectively almost wrote a thesis about above still does not make sense, then I recommend that you show it to a few friends or contacts that you trust, ideally non-roleplayers, different people, and see what they say. And I definitely give up at this point! \o/ =)

So this is nothing which you would personally benefit from, but you think someone else, who is not in this thread, might? Might you know anyone who might be able to contribute to this conversation to offer more insight?

Alas, they left site and said to me, “I prefer to roleplay in chat, but thanks.”

As I said, I give up, guys. Everything is cool for me anyway, so I might as well respond to the PMs I ignored for so long. I give up. \o/