search

amtgard / ORK3

Version 3 of the Online Record Keeper
Other
23 stars 12 forks source link

inactive parks #84

Open Tyedye opened 9 years ago

Tyedye commented 9 years ago

There should be something on the park page itself that indicates when it is inactive, for casual users.

Theoretically you should be able to see it when you go to park, admin, configure park, but even with inactive parks that lists them as active. (see CK, Eclipse)

Additionally, inactive parks, while not on the main atlas, are on the kingdom specific atlas. Perhaps a toggle on the main atlas, to chose weither or not to show them would solve this, so that when starting a new park you can view dead parks in the area, but when looking for a park to visit, you will not be given false hope.

Hunteil commented 9 years ago

I cannot thumb this up enough... Nothing like driving 5 states away for a vacation trip or whatever and looking up on the atlas finding a few parks. Drive to those a few extra hours to hit them too and no one shows up... (Yes I e-mailed all the parks in the area before coming with no responses.) Also this has happened more than once.

zellfaze-zz commented 9 years ago

It might be worth adding an option where parks can be reported as inactive by people as well. If a few folks report that a park is inactive we might mark it as such.

Sometimes parks just die and nobody bothers to mention anything.

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Hunteil notifications@github.com wrote:

I cannot thumb this up enough... Nothing like driving 5 states away for a vacation trip or whatever and looking up on the atlas finding a few parks. Drive to those a few extra hours to hit them too and no one shows up... (Yes I e-mailed all the parks in the area before coming with no responses.) Also this has happened more than once.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/amtgard/ORK3/issues/84#issuecomment-65906612.

Glenalth commented 9 years ago

Suggestion:

  1. Add a configurable time limit on the Kingdom config side of things.
  2. Any park that has not added credits in this time limit is considered "inactive"
  3. Any "inactive" park will display a notice of such on the page.
  4. Any "inactive" park will display on the atlas with a different icon and a notification of it being "inactive".

On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Derric Atzrott notifications@github.com wrote:

It might be worth adding an option where parks can be reported as inactive by people as well. If a few folks report that a park is inactive we might mark it as such.

Sometimes parks just die and nobody bothers to mention anything.

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Hunteil notifications@github.com wrote:

I cannot thumb this up enough... Nothing like driving 5 states away for a vacation trip or whatever and looking up on the atlas finding a few parks. Drive to those a few extra hours to hit them too and no one shows up... (Yes I e-mailed all the parks in the area before coming with no responses.) Also this has happened more than once.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/amtgard/ORK3/issues/84#issuecomment-65906612.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/amtgard/ORK3/issues/84#issuecomment-66818007.

Glenalth commented 9 years ago

2 more things...

.5. Move Ye Olde Empire parks back to their kingdoms, reinstating the deleted kingdom information, and use the inactive flag to keep them from showing up on the main kingdom park list. .6. Add "Defunct/Inactive Parks" link to each kingdom parks list.

awozniak commented 8 years ago

Seems like you could deduce active/inactive from attendance logs. Or show last time anyone attended on the park pages.

BenOvermyer commented 8 years ago

I'm in favor of a time-based update of the Active/Inactive flag. That'd be easy enough to add.

Tyedye commented 8 years ago

I am not. I know I am way behind updating, but I would like to update based on state of amtgard responces. Using the ork is not actually required. On Feb 11, 2016 1:35 PM, "Ben Overmyer" notifications@github.com wrote:

I'm in favor of a time-based update of the Active/Inactive flag. That'd be easy enough to add.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/amtgard/ORK3/issues/84#issuecomment-183027092.

BenOvermyer commented 8 years ago

Relying on manual processes opens the system up to human error, though. If using the ORK is not required, then where is the single source of truth for the data?

awozniak commented 8 years ago

Simply putting the last attendance date up on the park page would solve the first part of the original poster's complaint.

Hunteil commented 8 years ago

Deducing last active member signins won't work. Because if my park would fall apart. I'd go to another park and sign in there. If I don't move my profile over to their park b/c...lets say I'm driving an hour to get there. Then that attendance will show up in my home parks active feedback.

So we'd have to make sure the program is detecting the attendance at their park in question is needed too.

BenOvermyer commented 8 years ago

So are these the rules?

Glenalth commented 8 years ago

Active member and park requirements vary from kingdom to kingdom, it needs to be kingdom configurable.

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 3:41 PM Ben Overmyer notifications@github.com wrote:

So are these the rules?

  • A member is active if: they have a recent (last 6 months) sign-in at an event
  • A park is active if: it has had members (of any park) sign-in at an event it ran within the last 6 months
  • A kingdom is active if: it has not been deliberately marked inactive

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/amtgard/ORK3/issues/84#issuecomment-183069149.

BenOvermyer commented 8 years ago

Alright. That's going to be tricky, then, to do programmatically.

amtgard commented 8 years ago

Ben, that's part of the reason that reporting for Active/Contributing member and "average attendance" is so complicated. It's not a matter of counting records, it's a matter of counting records in accordance with both the rule book and the kingdom bylaws. Unfortunately, those documents are not technical specifications, they are social contracts.

As per this bug, we can simply have two flags:

One, a per-park flag marker which indicates that the system believes that the park is "Out of Date", similar to the way the front page flags park participation.

Park activity as currently recorded in the system is intended for administrative use. The kingdom officials of each Kingdom need to be able to move parks on and off their kingdom page based on their needs.

For instance, let's say we know that Mordengaard is participating every week, but the local PM is not so good. The "active" flag tells the kingdom and admins that this park exists and is active, whether they are good at reporting attendance or not. As separate flag can be used for when the system believes the park is truant in reporting; that should be configurable based on "missed weeks per semester", or some other metric or set of configurable metrics. For now, a hard-coded assumption (like the home page) is probably sufficient.

Glenalth commented 8 years ago

Sarah mentioned to me that there is also an issue with parks that just don't use the ORK for record keeping since it's not required, but still want an atlas listing.

I wonder what the pushback would be like at this point if the ORK was to be voted on as the required record keeping solution for Amtgard.

Tyedye commented 8 years ago

I don't know of any parks that chose not to use the ORK, but I know it used to be an use (looking at you, wetlands). Some kingdoms have voted it as their official kingdom method, but most have not. I think making a particular tool official is generally a bad idea, particularly since there is no good punishment for not keeping the records there.

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Glenalth notifications@github.com wrote:

Sarah mentioned to me that there is also an issue with parks that just don't use the ORK for record keeping since it's not required, but still want an atlas listing.

I wonder what the pushback would be like at this point if the ORK was to be voted on as the required record keeping solution for Amtgard.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/amtgard/ORK3/issues/84#issuecomment-183416087.

BenOvermyer commented 8 years ago

I don't think it should be "required," for exactly the reason you state, Tyedye.

However, use of the ORK should be encouraged, and the best way to encourage that use is to make it a good enough product that it solves more problems than it creates.

In that sense, maybe what the ORK really needs is not a mandate for people to use it, but rather a core, organized team akin to a startup. Not just (pure) developers, but people whose role it is to market it, do customer support, and so forth.

That is not really a discussion for this issue, though. Perhaps a new issue should be created to handle it?