L.A.W. - League of Anime Wrestling

Mini_B wrote: ↑

Tue May 06, 2025 1:35 am

Is Chasca, Jean, and Navia from Genshin Impact taken yet?

I don't know about the rest, but [mention]pu-level-up[/mention] has Jean.

Although, as much as it pains me to say this, technically, pu-level-up has been seemingly inactive on the LAW website for a while, which means that you might be able to get moderator approval to use Jean.

That being said, I have hardly a clue what the guidelines regarding inactivity and character references is. I've heard nebulous shit like "if they're gone for 6 months/1 year, you can claim character references"---but in those circumstances, there was very little clarity as to what "inactivity" meant. Some might define "inactivity" based on last site login date, but that becomes an irrelevant indicator when users opt to hide their activity/login status. Others might define "inactivity" based on the last post they made, without specifying whether said post can be any post or has to be an RP post.

Basically, guidelines for character reference claiming when prior claimants have been inactive are a massive ambiguous clusterfuck.

Anyways, tl;dr, if you want to be safe, just ask pu-level-up if you can use Jean. I figure they're still reachable via Discord.

Mini_B wrote: ↑

Tue May 06, 2025 1:35 am

Is Chasca, Jean, and Navia from Genshin Impact taken yet?

I have no clue about Chasca, but in addition to Jean, Navia is taken.

As a preliminary check, you can check this post to figure out which characters might be taken:
viewtopic.php?f=143&t=17119

1. Inactivity refers to last post.
2. 1yr is the limit for inactive claims typically.
3. Sometimes it can be sooner when you ask and have attempted contact with the old holder.
4. Generally, the closer to that 1yr mark, the better your case if no contact can be made.
5. If the old holder says no, then point 2 clocks in.

But in this exact one, Pu hasn't been alive since October of 2023, so you're pretty good to go.

Ichi wrote: ↑

Tue May 06, 2025 3:31 am

Mini_B wrote: ↑

Tue May 06, 2025 1:35 am

Is Chasca, Jean, and Navia from Genshin Impact taken yet?

I don't know about the rest, but @pu-level-up has Jean.

Although, as much as it pains me to say this, technically, pu-level-up has been seemingly inactive on the LAW website for a while, which means that you might be able to get moderator approval to use Jean.

That being said, I have hardly a clue what the guidelines regarding inactivity and character references is. I've heard nebulous shit like "if they're gone for 6 months/1 year, you can claim character references"---but in those circumstances, there was very little clarity as to what "inactivity" meant. Some might define "inactivity" based on last site login date, but that becomes an irrelevant indicator when users opt to hide their activity/login status. Others might define "inactivity" based on the last post they made, without specifying whether said post can be any post or has to be an RP post.

Basically, guidelines for character reference claiming when prior claimants have been inactive are a massive ambiguous clusterfuck.

Anyways, tl;dr, if you want to be safe, just ask pu-level-up if you can use Jean. I figure they're still reachable via Discord.

Monsy wrote: ↑

Tue May 06, 2025 3:48 am

1. Inactivity refers to last post.
2. 1yr is the limit for inactive claims typically.
3. Sometimes it can be sooner when you ask and have attempted contact with the old holder.
4. Generally, the closer to that 1yr mark, the better your case if no contact can be made.
5. If the old holder says no, then point 2 clocks in.

But in this exact one, Pu hasn't been alive since October of 2023, so you're pretty good to go.

Ichi wrote: ↑

Tue May 06, 2025 3:31 am

Mini_B wrote: ↑

Tue May 06, 2025 1:35 am

Is Chasca, Jean, and Navia from Genshin Impact taken yet?

I don't know about the rest, but @pu-level-up has Jean.

Although, as much as it pains me to say this, technically, pu-level-up has been seemingly inactive on the LAW website for a while, which means that you might be able to get moderator approval to use Jean.

That being said, I have hardly a clue what the guidelines regarding inactivity and character references is. I've heard nebulous shit like "if they're gone for 6 months/1 year, you can claim character references"---but in those circumstances, there was very little clarity as to what "inactivity" meant. Some might define "inactivity" based on last site login date, but that becomes an irrelevant indicator when users opt to hide their activity/login status. Others might define "inactivity" based on the last post they made, without specifying whether said post can be any post or has to be an RP post.

Basically, guidelines for character reference claiming when prior claimants have been inactive are a massive ambiguous clusterfuck.

Anyways, tl;dr, if you want to be safe, just ask pu-level-up if you can use Jean. I figure they're still reachable via Discord.

Thanks for the clarification. I'll assume that what you said is the standard. They seem like reasonable guidelines.

Although, not that I have any reason to doubt you, but is there a consensus among community authorities on those guidelines? Or any formal statement? To the best of my knowledge, there hasn't been official guidance on the matter (but I could be deadass wrong---in that case, feel free to slap me across the face for not knowing).

(Normally, I'd ask if Winner himself had given any guidelines, but I dislike the idea of implicitly assuming that Winner is the preeminent authority and/or has the final say in matters---recent-ish experience says that such presuppositions cause huge messes.)

In any case, what Monsy said aligns with what I believe to be the general understanding.
Even in the absence of official rulings, I think Monsy accurately described the de facto procedure.

If the procedure was formalized, then slapping me across the face with it would be warranted---my fault for being ignorant.

Otherwise, the de facto stuff is fine. And, should any community authority feel the need to make an official statement, I'd support the (likely) de facto reality that Monsy described.

I dunno if we really have said authorities anymore.

And there's no official statement to that I am aware of that's not buried in time.

These are the standards I am most familiar with, have always relayed, wrote the Reference Catalogue to reflect and my process for claiming old claims. Albeit with the lack of CaptainL now, I'll probably need to rewrite the catalogue explanation some.

Generally, someone looking at your case would ask if you attempted contact, especially if it's before the 1yr mark. It's always nice to try and do that where you can get an easy yes or no. If no contact can be made, then you'll get a yes, no or "wait till xyz" from a site mod (when those existed). If the old holder said "no" but just doesn't post, then 1yr benchmark wins.

If lurking really counted to reset the 1yr timer, then I'd call said standard stupid.

And sometimes people post exxxxxtremely rarely but want to hold onto several claims. This is where it could actually get somewhat nebulous and slippery. But generally the process would be the same of attempted contact for easy yes or no, then proceeding to a mod to get their POV and ruling if this fails.

Anyways. I go off to lurk myself. happy ref checking

Harem Girl wrote: ↑

Tue May 06, 2025 12:02 am

DSX93 wrote: ↑

Mon May 05, 2025 11:51 pm

Sigma has Shenhe. And I don't know the exact status of those three who were dropped. But the others, I believe are good.

Sorry, could I get you to verify that? (I would tag Sigma, but don't know how.)

Shenhe was the character that was dropped by Sigma, I asked a while ago and got the ok to use them, but due to the time want to make it clear. She was the one I was referring to when I said was taken by an active character, but was dropped. (I was just dropping there name.) I don't know if anyone else took her since then though.

The Character sheet that Sigma used for Shenhe is here, if that helps: viewtopic.php?t=15883&f=12#p321140

In that case, I don't know. I haven't seen anyone else using her, though.

[mention]Monsy[/mention] Thanks for the clarification. I appreciate it.

I'll now vomit some of my thoughts onto my keyboard. Obviously, there's no obligation or expectation for a response from you. Emesis sessions do not necessarily warrant responses.

---

I feel like what you described is a decent system that should handle most cases.

And yeah, when I think about it more closely, lurking resetting the timer seems like a tenuous standard at best, if not inadvisable.

Like you said, there are edge cases like extremely rare posting and posting just enough to circumvent the claim release rules that could get fucky. But, I think those are the sorts of cases that can be dealt with as they come up, rather than trying to make standards themselves address those cases.

---

Although, I'm kinda worried about the lack of site mods aside from Winner. Nothing against Winner, but I think that having only one admin (who also functions as a site mod) runs the risk of a bottleneck in operations, regardless of how active the one admin/site mod is.

If site mods are the ones responsible for figuring out claim issues, then centralizing all of that to one person runs the risk of overwhelming said person and holding up issue resolutions should said person become unavailable for a bit (something which can happen to anyone).

To clarify, no, I'm not asserting any wrongdoing from Winner here. Finding site mods is hard, and it's easy for issues to be deferred when they aren't pressing---energy is limited and life gets in the way sometimes. I'm referring to a structural issue here, not a Winner issue.

[image=https://www.pinterest.com/pin/156218680819170289/][/image]
Is dos available to be used as a reference?

That one is taken.