We went almost five days with only two players at the end of last dynasty, from Habanero joining the end of the second Grand Party to JohnathanDark’s joining post retroactively qualifying upon becoming a player.

Two participating players, that is.

On the fence on this one. The current wording isn’t working but I don’t think that the status quo ante is the answer.

[Bucky] Not sure I follow you, there. At the moment when you DoV’d in the previous dynasty, four players had taken wiki gamestate actions within the previous seven days, according to the wiki history page.

The DoV drew additional interest in the form of players joining and unidling.

If the new/unidling players hadn’t come out of the woodwork to reset the dormancy timer, we would’ve been less than a day away from dormancy at the 7 day mark since Habanero’s last action when the DoV passed/failed.

With that in mind, I’m in favor of getting rid of the “only two players” clause - extended hiatuses could easily trigger dormancy as soon as the hiatus ends, which is exactly the wrong time to do so.

Oh, I see what you mean.

Are you not voting because you don’t like the idea of Dormancy going back to being automatic?

Looks like an improvement over the current rule.