I have seven players in my crew. We're expecting one more to join us soon. We game every Thursday night. We don't play if one player can't make it. We meet up but do something else - okay we drink vodka and watch TV or some DVDs

All of us want to play. We agree on a night and stick to it. We all have hectic working and personal lives. Okay hectic is one of those words that doesn't really mean a thing. We just time manage well. We all have other hobbies - but gaming is something that we all enjoy together. A lot of it is the whole hanging out with friends deal.

We make the most of the time we set aside for gaming, anywhere between 5- 6 hours. This means all of us showing up on time, being genuinely interested in the game being played and realizing that this is something we all want to do, so lets just game. In all my years of gaming, I've not had to worry about making sure my group is regular

If the interest is there, time will be set aside for game night. (BTW, did I mention, that I'm a great GM )

Regards,
David R

The "to every player, a snack" thing is a simple but smart one; it goes beyond investment to instilling a sense of duty. As is, everyone brings something or other to the table, but if David or Tom were to skip the session or turn up late, there wouldn't be anything in particular we would be lacking. But if Tom was chips and dip, we'd be missing chips and dip for the session - and he knows it.

It's the player analogue of investment into character due to niche protection! Now I understand why you call it Cheetoism - the snacks really do underpin everything...

Quote from: JimBobOz... You don't lack time or energy, you just would rather play with group B than run group A ...

Well, one factor is that playing with group B would require less energy than running group A.  GMing involves a lot more energy than playing, so lack of energy is one factor here.  Travel time is another.  (And yes, interest level is another ...)

Quote from: JimBobOz...
You have the time, can make the time, to do whatever is important to you. Over on rpg.net, Cessna has "no time to game" - yet he has time to be an admin at rpg.net, and make several posts a day, and surf the net. So it is not that he does not have a few hours spare a week, simply that he'd rather spend those hours being an admin of a game site, than gaming.

Of course, doing something like 'surfing the net' or 'posting' involves only a few minutes here & there, spread across a day (as for administering a game site, I don't know, and I'm not trying to defend Cessna specifically here).  Getting a game together involves finding a single stretch of 4 hours or so to devote to one activity.

Quote from: JimBobOz...
Not at all. They physically have the time available to them, it's just a matter of wanting to set some aside for some particular purpose, and of having the organisational skills to get it done.  

Well, my job requires me to travel somewhat frequently (to conferences, etc.), so I'm physically not present all the time.  In the past I've gamed with people with similar job requirements.  Nobody is going to sacrifice their career for the sake of a hobby.  Also, job-related things can come up unexpectedly.  

These career-related challenges do not seem that unusual to me (certainly they are common in the circles in which I operate).

Quote from: JimBobOz...
I'm aware of that. "Fortnightly" was referring to Blue Seraph's post - linked in the original post of this thread - where he asked "is once every two weeks enough?" As always, reading posts thoroughly makes your response to them more useful.

Yeah, my apologies for being snarky. :imsorry: I was in a bad mood when I posted my earlier reply.

I think that your advice in general is well considered and useful.  My point was that many busy professionals that I know (including myself) have travel and time commitments that can make a weekly meeting at the same time & place not viable.  It seems unreasonable to assert that this is simply a matter of 'priorities' (except in the tivial sense that most people do obviously place more importance on their careers than their hobbies).  And it seems unreasonable to conclude that such persons should not enjoy being part of RPG campaigns simply because of their variable schedules.

Anyway, I'm sorry if I sounded overly hostile earlier, and I appreciate what advice you've given, even if I don't think that it's as universally valid as you appear to presuppose.

EDIT: I do have to concede, though, that had I been more interested in my current campaign, I would have at least tried harder to keep the game going.  The fact that I've been half-arsed in my efforts to plan future sessions shows that I don't have my heart in it.  And you're quite right that acknowledging and acting on this fact about my current priorities is important.