The Kingdom of the Emerald Hills

Here is why I feel visits should count...over 100 visits in three months to Eagleshire.

You CANT discount this. This means the park is getting consistent. Week to week might be a rollercoaster, but the averages with visitors reflects who came out to play....and that average is goooood.

_________________
[align=center]Sirrakhis Larethian of the Emerald Hills
G R E E N D R A G O N S
House Larethian-Got Newbs?[/align]

Visitors should not count. If you want them to count, get them to switch their residency to ES.

_________________
Forest Evergreen

Puppet Master of the EH

"Of course you are Forest. You're like the Mr. Burns of EH." - Finn

(insert titles and awards here)

For christ sake someone say more than they dont agree. I want someone to convince me why the parks popularity in games should not be represented.

Visitors taking advantage of population counts is notwithstanding either Forest, i already shot that one down on the eh list. But since the readers here may not have read it:

The concept that visitors *could* take advantage of the counting by playing at more than one park every weekend , since when are we even concerned about it, and after reviewing attendance, this is a BIG deal. Visitor counts do NOT put us over the top. But they are fully representative of a park run well and popular, which is the underlying spirit of elevating a parks status anyhow. A park that gets all the travellers is the park seen by most as a folcal point in its region. On the average, ES only sees 2-3 per week when looking at the past year, however the spike in the last three months(not even including JUNE) indicate that the park is getting popular again. Saying that all the peeps that dont claim a home park dont get counted is silly.

_________________
[align=center]Sirrakhis Larethian of the Emerald Hills
G R E E N D R A G O N S
House Larethian-Got Newbs?[/align]

The onus of proof is on you to have the change, not on me to keep the standard.

Show me why a visitor should count towards my parks attendance numbers. Why should you get to count players in your attendance who do not claim your park?

PArk attendance is to set the park size and the limitations on what awards it may hand out. There is no justification in using visitors to inflate that number.

_________________
Forest Evergreen

Puppet Master of the EH

"Of course you are Forest. You're like the Mr. Burns of EH." - Finn

(insert titles and awards here)

You're begging the question.

I dont need to change anything. Thats just it. There is no supportive documentation in the corpora to restrict head counts to residents only, it hasnt been clarified yet. And What standard? The only "Onus" present regarding parks in this kingdom is that the misconception that they arent doing well. My proof is simple regardless.

Example(not using our own parks to keep it objective):

How many people play Amtgard at ParkX: (shown in a ratio of resident to visitor)
week 1:28
23:5
week2:30
28:2
week3:39
32:7
week4:45
40:5

Asuming all the visitors were different people for the entire month, this would indicate that in one month, this park recieved 19 visitors. Of these 19 visitors, 14 did not play at another park that weekend. This is CONSISTENT with trends in our attendance in the EH. Visitor numbers do not have a realistic chance in hell of single-handedly bolstering numbers enough to elevate park status. This by itself is cause for refuting the idea they shouldnt count.



Burdening successful groups with stipulations on the status of people they encourage to come out to their park is gross error in good PR between parks, and serves to do nothing but campaign to take other parks members away from them, rather than simply encourage
interpark cooperation. While the parks may not be flourishing enough right now for this to be a non-issuse...just wait until the game gets press again and we get a huge influx of people again. We cant encourage a policy of segregating numbers in attendance based solely on hypothetical situations which have no record of ever occurring or even being possible based on visitor transit.



So now we've got something juicy. With no Duchy, no Duchy-level awards can get out there. This in itself isnt such a bad thing when viewed this way, except that this problem has nothing to do with whether or not a participant at a park is a visitor, unless you're concerned that somehow some visitor might get an award from the wrong park officer...and something like that is just silly.

_________________
[align=center]Sirrakhis Larethian of the Emerald Hills
G R E E N D R A G O N S
House Larethian-Got Newbs?[/align]

When attendance is counted by the Monrachy for park level, it does not include visitors. To do so WOULD be a change from the way we currently do things.

Again you have yet to show why visitor attendance should count towards the status of the park. I see no reason why multiple parks should be able to claim the same person for matters of population.

_________________
Forest Evergreen

Puppet Master of the EH

"Of course you are Forest. You're like the Mr. Burns of EH." - Finn

(insert titles and awards here)

Actually, attendance is based on attendance; Not on the number of people claiming that park as their home. This was the metric decided by Kaz and I when we began reviewing parks for promotion/demotion.

If a park pulls 30 people a week, we don't care who they are or where they claim they are from. What you care about is attendance over time.

I feel that "Who" shouldnt matter at all...but the "How Many" certainly does. Brennon posted about the same it seems too.

Kitn also thought up a system where all parks are Baronies as well but never realy elaborated on it.

Brennon's explanation seems more realistic than nein because someone might play magic with the numbers.

The bottom line here is a significant number of people claim EH, and no park, and alot of them play in ES regularly. I cant see how these or any others really dont count because of the home park they chose.

The Hom park choice I thought was to distinguish demographics on votes and dues collection.

_________________
[align=center]Sirrakhis Larethian of the Emerald Hills
G R E E N D R A G O N S
House Larethian-Got Newbs?[/align]

Ok, I will post this here as well.

Once again:
The actual promotion process is outlined in and dictated by a contract between the Kingdom of the Emerald Hills Inc, and representatives of a subgroup park. The relevant wording in the contract:

1. A new group may become a Shire upon both parties signing this contract.
2. A group may become a Barony after achieving the following criteria:
i. One year of existence after initial contact with the B.O.D.
ii. Average attendance of twenty (20) different players per event.
iii. Approval of the Grantor Monarch.
3. A group may become a Duchy after achieving the following criteria:
i. Two years of existence after initial contact with the B.O.D.
ii. Average attendance of forty (40) different players per event.
iii. Approval of the Grantor Monarch

And in case you were wondering this wording is identical to the Burning Lands park contract.

/me does a little dance.

Finders Keep, you need to check your numbers methinks

_________________
[align=center]Sirrakhis Larethian of the Emerald Hills
G R E E N D R A G O N S
House Larethian-Got Newbs?[/align]

minus the paperwork i think we qualify for dutchy

Ok Tobias, let's look at it this way. For the past 6 months we have averaged 21 players per event. For the past 3 months we have averaged 35 players per event. Yes we are growing and growth is always welcomed, but we shouldn't start talking about duchy until we are positive that we can maintain our currents numbers and continue to grow. Older players drop out and not all new players stay for long. We have been blessed with several new players who are currently very dedicated to the game. But a short term population growth doesn't warrant instantaneous increase in park status. Those in the past have worked extremely hard to get Finders Keep to Barony status. You are fortunate enough to not have been active during a period of time when we were lucky to have 5 people at park. I am sure that the everyone would hate to see us be promoted and then not maintain those numbers. I am not saying that we can't or won't maintain our currents numbers, I am saying that there is a ebb and flow to this game, and numbers fluctuate over time. I and several others at the park want to make sure that we can maintain our current numbers and continue to grow over a extended period of time before we take on the responsiblity of duchy status.

Trianna Allensworth

Interesting, I have been getting told that FK sign-ins were 35-50 per week.

wierd.

_________________
[align=center]Sirrakhis Larethian of the Emerald Hills
G R E E N D R A G O N S
House Larethian-Got Newbs?[/align]

Some of our sign in are 35-50 if you count vistor, and we understand that they do count. However, do the weeks where we have lost sign in sheets count as 0 in the averages or not? Even still not including vistors we at best have only had these numbers for 3 months. I understand there isn't a time period for these numbers, but I would to think you should have to keep those numbers a lot longer than three months.

Trianna

Lost sign-in sheets are no bueno, and are directly subject to the decree of the crown/pm with regards to their validity in averaging the attendance.

There is not "set precedence" for what happens to peep's records with regard to lost sign-in sheets. When i was approached about FK's missing documentation I referred those looking for help directly to the crown, because regardless of what I would do, the crown has the final word in this anyhow.

In general, I have never heard of a park being raised legitimately for anything less than siz months of consistency, so there may be some more work ahead of everyone in getting the numbers to a "warm & fuzzy" level.

_________________
[align=center]Sirrakhis Larethian of the Emerald Hills
G R E E N D R A G O N S
House Larethian-Got Newbs?[/align]