Valid Relocation Threads

Heyo! I just wanted to ask if Read Only posts can count for relocation threads for a pack? 
If not that's fine, just seemed worth asking lol <3

I doubt it. In my experience, pack founding/relocation threads follow roughly the same criteria as trade threads: 10+ posts, conclusion, archived.

I thought we only needed 3 archived threads showing territory claim to count for relocation now? I read the guidelines for it yesterday but maybe i read it wrong lol

Correct, pack relocation threads need the same requirements as pack founding threads!

The thread count was increased to bring pack relocation slightly more in line with pack formation when groups are competing for territories, so threads would need to involve the same level of participation across the board! Relocation just requires less due to already being established as a pack.

Wait so it’s not 3 archived threads to relocate? How many is it now? I checked the guidebook and it says 3 archived threads. I understand it has to be 10+ posts in each thread, but it’s still 3 correct?

The requirement to relocate a pack is 3 threads with at least 10 posts and the threads must be archived.

TL;DR the initial question was if Read Only's would count as a relocation thread and they do not count.

Nope, it is 3 threads!  The threads just can't be read only since pack formation threads generally also can't be read only - they gotta have a little bit of interaction behind them!

And, while 10 posts is a safe number to shoot for, there is no "official" count needed.  Just bring the thread to a conclusion that feels right and makes sense.  Typically threads do make it to 10, but if it feels unnatural to do so, I wouldn't stress over it.

Nope, it is 3 threads!  The threads just can't be read only since pack formation threads generally also can't be read only - they gotta have a little bit of interaction behind them!

And, while 10 posts is a safe number to shoot for, there is no "official" count needed.  Just bring the thread to a conclusion that feels right and makes sense.  Typically threads do make it to 10, but if it feels unnatural to do so, I wouldn't stress over it.

A little off-topic, but I think it would be helpful to set a minimum post count across the board for trade, foundation, relocation etc. threads. When standards vary based on whoever is approving, it becomes a little frustrating. Just my two cents!

I also think it would be helpful to clarify these thread standards within the language of the Guidebook, because as it reads now, there's no explicit prohibition against Read Only or even short (2-4 post) threads for counting toward formation or relocation.

I know it doesn't seem like a big deal to add this, but this kind of follows perfectly on the changes to the guidebook we did make.

We are trying to get away from imposing technicalities, edge cases, and specifics in the guidebook.  It doesn't always take a certain number of posts for a thread to conclude and we want those conclusions to be able to be natural.  We are trying to move away from imposing ooc guidelines that needlessly restrict IC flow.  From what I remember, we've never had a single instance where a formation was prevented based on thread length - it's always been threads not archived or member qualifications.  (Correct me if I'm wrong!)

We don't want to decline packs based on a technicality, and we don't want to have to count (or force you to count) posts.  As long as the thread tells a story and involves more than one member of the pack it's valid.  The reason a Read Only doesn't apply is because it isn't a thread - it's a single post.  Those can take a lot of effort to write, don't get me wrong!  But they don't fit with the spirit of the requirements of "Pack" formation or relocation - that it's the pack doing it, not a single character.

There's always going to be cases that buck the mold and we want to allow those to happen.  For example, guardian threads where the intruder is immediately chased off, or storyteller threads that tell a detailed story but may fall short on length.  It's really arbitrary sometimes what makes a thread "complete" and can vary across writers/characters, so it's easier and less restrictive to allow PMs and us (and you!) to make a judgement call as to what we feel counts.

There's always going to be cases that buck the mold and we want to allow those to happen.  For example, guardian threads where the intruder is immediately chased off, or storyteller threads that tell a detailed story but may fall short on length.  It's really arbitrary sometimes what makes a thread "complete" and can vary across writers/characters, so it's easier and less restrictive to allow PMs and us (and you!) to make a judgement call as to what we feel counts.

I understand you, and I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment.

I still think that "no Read Only threads" should be added to the stipulations for formation and relocation, given that it's now come up as a question here.

(I'm really not meaning to be an annoying tit, BTW — sorry if I'm coming off that way!)

Ah okay! Sorry if I made it a big deal! :’D I just got confused by what Liv was asking and wanted to clarify just in case the rules were changed but not updated in the guidebook yet. Thank you so much for clarifying. And I love everything that was said in this thread. Very informative and helps clear up lots of confusion. <3