What I think would be useful is to have a Bump link that shows up in Wanted - Players for the person who created a thread.  This would function exactly the same as the bump links in the game forums (the ones that let the GM bump a thread without making changes or edits).

The reason for this is simple.

I see a large number of WP posts that each week the author logs in and adds a post that JUST SAYS *BUMP*.

This adds nothing to the content, and for me personally seeing this makes me less likely to join that game.

Adding a bump link to the threads would allow the original poster the option of either A) Posting a new message that actually adds content to the thread, or B) Just bumping it.

From a technical stand point, the dificulty for this would likely be minimal (not positive, as I do not have access to the code. ;) ).

The benefit would simply be whatever reduction in overhead is produced by eleminating millions of needless messages taht just say *BUMP* (or in some cases *bump*).  :P

Would also make the advertisements look cleaner.

This is something I personally would suggest as a core feature and not a subscriber feature, as it is something that would be solidly useful to any GM that spends more than a week advertising his game (or even those who come back a few weeks/months later looking for new players).

I would like (and use) this feature as a GM... and would support it as either core or subscriber-only (the only reason it would be a good option for subscriber-only is that NOT having it does not decrease the functionality of the forum, and having it doesn't really increase the functionality either, just makes it easier, or look prettier, and would be a good draw feature for subscribers)

Oh, I like to know that the GM has blindly bumped the game every week for the last 45 weeks. It means I won't be joining the game.

In reply to JohnB (msg #3):

You can still get that info by looking at dates and such. ^^

At least you can see the date of the first posting, and the date it was last edited.
This message was last edited by the user at 08:46, Wed 17 June 2009.

But I can't see the 45 bumps in between :)

As a GM I like the fact the bumps can't be seen -  as a Player, I don't like it because I can't see how often it has been bumped before.

And to be honest - anyone who can't be bothered to key in the six characters that make up  *Bump* is probably too lazy to be of any interest to me as a GM :)  Personally - unless there is a decent  post in both the first and the last slot of the advert, I just move straight on :)

To me, it is WORSE to have an ugly unproductive post.

I would rather make edits to the first post and then tell the system to bump it (if that is an option).

Not every GM is going to be lazy.

I personally think that the idea of ANY posts that are just to bump the thread is a bad thing.  ^^;;  It is messy, and looks unprofessional.  :P

It would really be better to just write out a new advertisement all together based on the current game status.

I'll go with that suggestion  -  auto delete the old advert and make the GM write a new one each time they bump :)

I would agree with that, except for the fact that some otherwize lazy people have turned out to be excelent GM's at times. ;P  You would end up with the first and second add for the game being excelent, then all the adds after that saying



:P

They will soon discover cut and paste ...  :(

To be honest, I'd prefer that GMs not put just "bump" in their post and would rather insert information that is up to date about what they're seeking and how the game is going.

Granted, this doesn't work in favor of games that are recruiting in perpetuity, but perhaps I'm biased against such games.  I'd not be in favor of a silent bump option for W-P.  Like others above, I want to see how much effort the GM is putting in.

I prefer to edit my first post in Wanted - Players rather than posting a detailed update in a new post. That way, a potential player doesn't have to scroll down to the bottom of the thread only to discover that I'm only looking for someone to take the role of a particular character. From that perspective, an invisible bump is great. A potential player can easily look at the edit date of the original post to see that I've updated it.

It's probably important to note that having the "bump" option doesn't stop people from still doing a manual bump. So cruinne, the invisibump feature doesn't stop someone from editing up-to-date information, and in fact encourages them to update their original post. (I'm assuming here that the bump would work exactly the same as if you were a GM, namely you have to click "edit" then check the "bump" button.)

As far as practicality, I can certainly see how this would be helpful. Some games bump in perpetuity, as cruinne mentioned, and others simply don't get enough applications the first week. As far as what I as a player prefer... well, I don't think I should be adding (or excluding) site features for the purpose of forcing a GM to post in a manner I prefer. In the overall scheme of things, the bump button really does very little to affect the overall player's experience.

+1 for me.

And an "invisible bump" function would hide the difference between them.  As another player who wouldn't join a game whose GM had simply posted "bump" once per week for the last two years, I'd just as soon not join a game whose GM hadn't even posted that much, just pushed a button, every week in that time.

With the current system, I can see which games are in perpetual recruitment, and avoid them.

-1.

In reply to bigbadron (msg #13):

Can I ask why you avoid games that are constantly recruiting? Are you avoiding certain types of games (arenas, large games, forums) or is there just something about constant recruitment that's indicative of the game that you don't like?

If the former, I would certainly think that the description should clear that up right away (if not, a look at the cast list and game categories will). If the latter... I wonder if that problem actually comes up often enough to warrant avoiding an otherwise helpful feature.

Yes. I think you are.

But I still agree with you fellows. More transparency is always good, and the convenience afforded by a mechanical bump wouldn't offset the decreased transparency. Also, this might cause spam. >_<

-1

But, at the moment, I only have to look at the W-P menu.  If the "Replies" column shows more than a certain quantity, I don't open the thread at all, because I've probably seen the ad a number of times before.  If I wasn't interested all those other times, I'm unlikely to be interested now.

Because it's often indicative of games that I'm not interested in (arenas, large games, forums, plus some others), plus it makes me wonder why the GM is always searching for new players (is he in danger of biting off more than he can chew in terms of player numbers, or does the game have a high player attrition rate?  Both are danger signs IMO).

In reply to bigbadron (msg #16):

I get what you are saying, I just don't know that it comes up often enough to be a real worry. Maybe I'm wrong; I rarely get enticed by the titles of the ever-post games (many of them are freeform, which I don't do).

I did have an idea, though, that could be a bit of a compromise (though I don't know about the technical issues involved). What if every time you invisibumped it still increased the post count by 1? That way people who don't want to join 44 W-P post games don't have to click on it, and people who do can see the first post without having to go to the previous page.