|
So, just saying... You're at a public venue where you pass the sign in sheet around the table to be ultimately collected by a stranger at a con and given to another stranger at the con or, locally, given to one of your fellow players.
I personally wouldn’t have an issue with it but I’m looking at others in this thread saying they wouldn’t feel comfortable with someone other than the gm taking photos. Again, asking for consent or deleting a photo if someone asks you to isn't a big deal.
I don’t know what else to say other than "don’t do something in PFS if another player feels unsafe or uncomfortable with your actions."
Many of these issues would be solved with some kind of electronic system; no sheets to pass around and faster turnaround on AcP. Or, a paper fallback with the player’s chronicle in the worst-case scenario of lost and unreported games.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, just saying... You're at a public venue where you pass the sign in sheet around the table to be ultimately collected by a stranger at a con and given to another stranger at the con or, locally, given to one of your fellow players.In all cases, you should ask everyone if they're okay with it. My guess is that in most cases people will be fine with it. In the set of cases where someone isn't, there's probably a good reason and you should respect their privacy.
Yeah, asking first is fine. My main point was that as a policy for Paizo to have, "take a picture of other people's personal info" doesn't seem like a good one. Keep in mind that VOs no longer have access to view/fix events because people having access to that information was a privacy concern. And these are official volunteers who have signed agreements. To then turn around and tell a random person it's ok to take a photo of the same information seems like not a good idea.
Especially when the player already has a record that they played the game in the form of the chronicle sheet. If we're reporting things to a "catchall" event number, you don't need everyone else's information to have yours reported.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What differentiates me sitting behind the GM screen from me sitting in front of the GM screen--often on the same day?
That's not the point. I don't know why another player would be uncomfortable with that, nor do I want to know; it's none of your business or mine. If someone's not comfortable with you doing something, don't do it. If it's a bigger issue, then talk to the event organizer and find a solution.
Honestly, this is also an extreme edge case; I don't understand why just asking first and explaining what you're doing is a big deal.
Hey I'd like to grab a photo of the sign-in sheet just in case it gets lost, everyone cool with that?
|
|
What differentiates me sitting behind the GM screen from me sitting in front of the GM screen--often on the same day?That's not the point. I don't know why another player would be uncomfortable with that, nor do I want to know; it's none of your business or mine. If someone's not comfortable with you doing something, don't do it. If it's a bigger issue, then talk to the event organizer and find a solution.
Honestly, this is also an extreme edge case; I don't understand why just asking first and explaining what you're doing is a big deal. "Hey I like to grab a photo of the sign-in sheet in case it gets lost, everyone cool with that?"
If there's a personal issue between two players, it's much easier to avoid the table the person you don't want to have your info is GMing than it is to avoid a table they are at as a player.
|
Venture-Captain, Wisconsin—Franklin
|
What differentiates me sitting behind the GM screen from me sitting in front of the GM screen--often on the same day?
The difference is that when you GM, I as a player choose to be at your table. If I thought you were going to do something questionable with my information I can not play. If I have reason to suspect you've done something with it, there are people I can go to with that complaint. It a VC or Regional person, convention personnel, or a store's management. It's to their benefit to make sure people involved in these activities are safe.
If you are a player then there's nothing. Maybe I know your name or can back track and figure out your PFS number. If its a con, I almost certainly am out of luck. Sure, if its a local store it'd be a much easier problem to solve but even then there's no guarantee. If you're dead set on absolutely having a picture, it takes three seconds to ask and if someone has an issue you can resolve it like adults. Your AcP isn't worth another player's feeling of safety.
Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Bellevue
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You could always ask to black out your information in that case. You won't get AcP, but you will protect your privacy.
Honestly, I've reported a lot of of games on-line at this point. I don't even need half the information on the sign in sheet. For those who haven't done it, All I really need is your player number, character number, character name and faction. If you've registered your character online, the last two autofill in the form.
If you prefer to black out your player name, that works just fine.
I do know that at a large convention like GenCon, I offered players the opportunity to photograph the sheet. I've run into common errors with unclear writing. 9s look like 8s or 7s. Etc. Then, sheets can get misplaced at big conventions. I know I was able to clear up some errors from games I GM'd. I think it's reasonable to offer players an easy fix option for data entry errors. (ie, that was 12345 not 12346)
The one thing I wished I'd done is write my email address on the form before they photograph. Which would give players at my tables another avenue to ask questions if a game doesn't get reported right. I would not ask players to share that info. But as a VA, I don't mind getting emails asking about games I ran (or hosted).
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Columbia
|
You could always ask to black out your information in that case. You won't get AcP, but you will protect your privacy.Or we could figure out a system that doesn't necessitate 7 people keeping a full record of the table.
That's what we are trying to do. It will be online, so you might as well forget a paper system. I don't foresee it happening.
|
Venture-Agent, Washington—Seattle
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you wanted to speed up reporting....
Is it possible to copy/paste special into a website like it is from one spreadsheet into another spreadsheet ? Copy/ paste an entire line or better yet, a box of text off of google sheets into a website would be a LOT faster and more accurate than manually entering it.
Oh dear god this is high on my wishlist. Right up there with auto-filled PDFs emailed to players based on reported info. Lost a sheet? No problem, generate another one from your portal.
|
|
That's what we are trying to do. It will be online, so you might as well forget a paper system. I don't foresee it happening.You could always ask to black out your information in that case. You won't get AcP, but you will protect your privacy.Or we could figure out a system that doesn't necessitate 7 people keeping a full record of the table.
But when problems with the online system are pointed out, and the "fix" is for everyone to start taking photos of every reporting sheet for their games, maybe we should look at a different way to handle the online system.
If we're going to default to a paper record (or a photo of a paper record) when the online system fails, use the one that players already have -- their chronicle.
|
|
In all cases, you should ask everyone if they're okay with it. My guess is that in most cases people will be fine with it. In the set of cases where someone isn't, there's probably a good reason and you should respect their privacy.
Have them fill out the sheet last then. Take the picture before they sign in. Everyone that wants the photo backup is in the group picture everyone that's paranoid but uses their meatspace name anyway isn't.
|
|
Have them fill out the sheet last then. Take the picture before they sign in. Everyone that wants the photo backup is in the group picture everyone that's paranoid but uses their meatspace name anyway isn't.
In all cases, you should ask everyone if they're okay with it. My guess is that in most cases people will be fine with it. In the set of cases where someone isn't, there's probably a good reason and you should respect their privacy.
But then what's the point of having a photo of the reporting sheet, if it doesn't have all of the players on it? What is gained by having a photo of the reporting sheet that you don't already have with the chronicle (as a player)? If it's not the ability to report the full table, then why have it at all? If you need to prove that you were at a table, you can already do that with the chronicle.
A player can't report the table. They don't have access to the event number. A Venture Officer can't report the table unless they are associated with the event, in which case if the table isn't already being reported, then they are part of the issue.
So, then is it going to be reported under a different event number? If so, then why not just report a table with the single player making the request... which you can do based on their chronicle sheet.
|
|
But then what's the point of having a photo of the reporting sheet, if it doesn't have all of the players on it? What is gained by having a photo of the reporting sheet that you don't already have with the chronicle (as a player)?
You have a backup in case the DM loses the sheet, doesn't report it, etc so that you and the people that signed up can get their ACP.
Yes, the person that didn't want to be in the group picture doesn't get their ACP.... that they weren't going to get anyway. I don't see why 1/6th of a table missing out is worse than the entire table missing out.
Again, around here ya'll have this weird idea that every solution needs to perfectly deal with every contingency instead of just being a better solution to that contingency.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
But then what's the point of having a photo of the reporting sheet, if it doesn't have all of the players on it? What is gained by having a photo of the reporting sheet that you don't already have with the chronicle (as a player)?You have a backup in case the DM loses the sheet, doesn't report it, etc so that you and the people that signed up can get their ACP.
Yes, the person that didn't want to be in the group picture doesn't get their ACP.... that they weren't going to get anyway. I don't see why 1/6th of a table missing out is worse than the entire table missing out.
Again, around here ya'll have this weird idea that every solution needs to perfectly deal with every contingency instead of just being a better solution to that contingency.
The GM is already taking a photo of the reporting sheet in case it gets lost in the process. You seem to have the idea that a player has to be responsible for all of the other players at the table. A player is responsible for keeping track of their own records, not the GM's records, or the other players' records.
As a player, if I email a VO with a scan of my chronicle sheet, why is that not enough to have whatever is going to happen from there happen to get me my AcPs?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again, around here ya'll have this weird idea that every solution needs to perfectly deal with every contingency instead of just being a better solution to that contingency.
It's a weird idea that asking the table for permission is somehow too challenging or impossible. That's really all people are advocating here.
Hey can I snapshot the sheet in case it gets lost?
Sure.
CLICK!
|
|
Bahb asked both players and GMs to take pictures of their chronicle sheets at GenCon so that the data can be recovered when inevitably some sheets are lost or misfiled etc. After years of players complaining about their sessions not being reported.
How it's gone for me... End of Session, "Hey GM Can I see the sign-in sheet to take a picture."
GM "Oh ya, good idea, I should take a picture too."
I'm not secretly stealing the sheet for photos. In at least some cases 1 or more players has already left the table.
I think it's a situation of polite acknowledgement, not an actual need for permission. I mean you're already writing the info down on a sheet that you're passing around.
|
|
It's a weird idea that asking the table for permission is somehow too challenging or impossible. That's really all people are advocating here.
*headsscratch*
Wolf "here is a solution for someone refusing to be in the group photo that gets people their ACP"
You "you're saying its impossible to ask people to be in the group photo"
|
|
It's a weird idea that asking the table for permission is somehow too challenging or impossible. That's really all people are advocating here.
*headsscratch*
Wolf "here is a solution for someone refusing to be in the group photo that gets people their ACP"
You "you're saying its impossible to ask people to be in the group photo"
Hey can I snapshot the sheet in case it gets lost?
A player says "Sorry no."
OK. I respect that. GM, please don't lose the sheet.
Edit: We take photos in our area, and have done so for AGES. I'm not against doing this. I simply never even thought people would be upset about it until reading this thread. So overall, I guess I don't see how/why checking in with players, and working around/respecting a "no" from someone (which is an EXTREME edge case) is difficult. (Or at least polite acknowledgment as Rob said.)
Overall, an electronic solution where we don't need players backing up basic records would be nice.
Personally, I also photograph sign-ins and then enter the data into a spreadsheet on the cloud. That is before I even report the game on Paizo. My spreadsheet serves as my primary backup, and I delete the photos after the game is reported.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bahb asked both players and GMs to take pictures of their chronicle sheets at GenCon so that the data can be recovered when inevitably some sheets are lost or misfiled etc. After years of players complaining about their sessions not being reported.
How it's gone for me... End of Session, "Hey GM Can I see the sign-in sheet to take a picture."
GM "Oh ya, good idea, I should take a picture too."
I'm not secretly stealing the sheet for photos. In at least some cases 1 or more players has already left the table.
I think it's a situation of polite acknowledgement, not an actual need for permission. I mean you're already writing the info down on a sheet that you're passing around.
It's just a weird stance for a company to take when they've already told us that VOs having access to event data beyond the ones they are responsible for is a privacy concern.
But that's only part of it. .
There also seems to be a belief that if you don't take a photo of the reporting sheet, then you can't get your AcPs if the game isn't otherwise reported. That because a player hasn't taken the step to account for everyone at the table, we won't give them credit for being at the table.
This becomes a particular issue with new players. The bookkeeping for PFS is already complicated enough as a player that throwing an, "Oh, yeah, make sure you take a picture of the signup sheet, too," at them is just too much.
And that's before taking into account players that don't have a smartphone/camera phone (they exist).
|
|
The GM is already taking a photo of the reporting sheet in case it gets lost in the process.
The DM is already the most likely point of failure in the reporting system.
You seem to have the idea that a player has to be responsible for all of the other players at the table.
No. And please stop ascribing motives to my ideas and then discounting the ideas based on not liking that motivation. For one, the motivation is irrelevant and two, you are very, very. VERY bad at deciding what ideas are in my head. Like, worse than broken clock bad.
It's not about blame or responsibility it's about having 2 or 3 or 5 points of failure instead of 1
A player is responsible for keeping track of their own records, not the GM's records, or the other players' records.
It has nothing to do with the responsibility, its about what actions can you take that will get you the best results.
As a player, if I email a VO with a scan of my chronicle sheet, why is that not enough to have whatever is going to happen from there happen to get me my AcPs?
Why does it have to be an or thing? You having that scan gets you your ACP, having the picture gets the whole table their ACP.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's a weird idea that asking the table for permission is somehow too challenging or impossible. That's really all people are advocating here.
*headsscratch*
Wolf "here is a solution for someone refusing to be in the group photo that gets people their ACP"
You "you're saying its impossible to ask people to be in the group photo"
Hey can I snapshot the sheet in case it gets lost?
A player says "Sorry no."
Players Z X C V sign the sheet. Photo is taken. Player A signs the sheet.
The photo doesn't self update. Now the players that wanted the redundancy have it and the one that wanted their privacy has it. What problem are you seeing here?
|
|
Players Z X C V sign the sheet. Photo is taken. Player A signs the sheet.
The photo doesn't self update. Now the players that wanted the redundancy have it and the one that wanted their privacy has it. What problem are you seeing here?
Absolutely no problem!
I am just advocating for getting consent based on what others have said in this thread. (And again: I had no idea anyone would have an issue with a photographed sign-in sheet until today).
That's all. If you don't have consent, don't do it or find a compromise just as you suggest. I absolutely agree that it doesn't need to be an either-or situation — if I came off otherwise, apologies for the lack of clarity; it's late here in California.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I also think this thread has gone off the rails about a minor issue that almost no VO will have to deal with — and it's one that can be handled with basic respect and common sense.
The root issue here is that the reporting system is so janky we need random players to help back up basic records. That's simply ridiculous.
The commonality of lost sign-ins and unreported games, alongside slow reporting, will have a negative impact on AcP as discussed throughout this thread.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a player, if I email a VO with a scan of my chronicle sheet, why is that not enough to have whatever is going to happen from there happen to get me my AcPs?Why does it have to be an or thing? You having that scan gets you your ACP, having the picture gets the whole table their ACP.
Because that's the way the solution was presented in this thread. It doesn't have to be an "or," but showing a chronicle has been deemed unacceptable (not by you, specifically, just a general pushback against granting AcPs based on a chronicle audit), yet somehow this is a better solution.
If a player wants to take the initiative to take a photo of the reporting sheet, and the other players at the table don't have an issue with it, that's fine. If we start telling players that in order to guarantee they get their AcPs, they must take a photo of the reporting sheet, that's a problem.
|
Venture-Captain, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
It's because it would have been blocked in the old system too? I would be annoyed if the Bellflower Tiller and Juggler get locked behind that system but we haven't hit that point yet.We have already reached that point: you can't access certain content without boons.
By tomorrow night I will have earned over 200 AcP; with a paper system, I'd already be building my second race-boon character. Instead, we're going to have to wait another n+1 months to access PFS-legal content.
And once AcP is online, we will be at the complete mercy of those doing the reporting.
Assuming that I haven't completely screwed up who Tividar is he should be the last person to complain. I'm not sure about the exact details but we're a pretty accommodating lodge when it comes to that stuff. He might even be playing a Leshy for PFS credit this very week.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
<<begin rant>>
Wow... Did this go sideways...
First, I WILL take a picture of the reporting sheet as a player. Period. I will not accept being told no.
Second, I don't have a problem with someone knowing my name or my Organized Play number. I don't see how someone can cause me harm by knowing these two pieces of information. Are they going to be able to open a credit card in my name??? What are they going to do, use my number when playing so I get credit for their table???? Just doesn't make sense. If a person has a problem putting their name on a reporting sheet, they DON'T have fill out that spot. It is not required. Only the Organized Play number, character number, and faction are required for reporting. All the rest of the information is extra, unnecessary information.
The benefits of having a picture far out way privacy concerns, especially when there is only 3 pieces of information needed, none of which are "personally identifiable information".
Get over it folks and move on.
<<End rant>>
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let's think past the the whole "Look, I played this adventure and thus have enough AcP points to play this awesome race."
Historically, to play a race that has not been open for play to the player base as a whole has required a Boon. The only way to get the necessary boon is to have the AcP points and print it out from the Paizo website.
So the concept of showing that I would have points to get the race, but because it has not been reported yet, I get to play the race without the boon does not make sense.
The correct way to show that you have access to a race that is not open to the general player base is with a boon.
|
|
RANT
Common-sense compromises are suggested above; no need to rant.
Let's think past the the whole "Look, I played this adventure and thus have enough AcP points to play this awesome race."
Historically, to play a race that has not been open for play to the player base as a whole has required a Boon. The only way to get the necessary boon is to have the AcP points and print it out from the Paizo website.
So the concept of showing that I would have points to get the race, but because it has not been reported yet, I get to play the race without the boon does not make sense.
The correct way to show that you have access to a race that is not open to the general player base is with a boon.
I don't think anyone is saying to remove race boons? just that a compromise or paper backup option to bolster AcP is a good idea because reporting is so unreliable that we advocate for random players — not GMs — to create backups for when it's lost.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think anyone is saying to remove race boons?
No. They have suggested that as an stop-gap measure. I don't agree with it either because that's just too much work for me as a GM to keep up with: counting scenarios and estimating AcPs off of a player's session log.
The argument goes: I know that a Leshy is supposed to cost 80 AcP. I've played 20 sessions. Four times twenty is eighty. I should have 80 AcP. Let me play a Leshy. They hand me a session log with 20 PFS(2) scenarios on it.
That's the best case scenario.
Someone else hands me a log with 13 PFS(2) scenarios on it. They say they have 80 AcP because some of those scenarios were at conventions.
Someone else hands me a log with 18 PFS(2) scenarios, including 5 quests, but that player didn't realize that quests are only 1 point, and I now have to explain why they can't play a Leshy.
Someone else at the table says, "Wait! We can do that? Let me log into my account and pull up my session log. Give me 2 seconds." 10 minutes later. "OK! Here it is. Now just give me 2 seconds to make a character for this Leshy!"
...or we could just all wait until the system was finished.
|
|
I don't think anyone is saying to remove race boons?No. They have suggested that as an stop-gap measure. I don't agree with it either because that's just too much work for me as a GM to keep up with: counting scenarios and estimating AcPs off of a player's session log.
The argument goes: I know that a Leshy is supposed to cost 80 AcP. I've played 20 sessions. Four times twenty is eighty. I should have 80 AcP. Let me play a Leshy. They hand me a session log with 20 PFS(2) scenarios on it.
That's the best case scenario.
Someone else hands me a log with 13 PFS(2) scenarios on it. They say they have 80 AcP because some of those scenarios were at conventions.
Someone else hands me a log with 18 PFS(2) scenarios, including 5 quests, but that player didn't realize that quests are only 1 point, and I now have to explain why they can't play a Leshy.
Someone else at the table says, "Wait! We can do that? Let me log into my account and pull up my session log. Give me 2 seconds." 10 minutes later. "OK! Here it is. Now just give me 2 seconds to make a character for this Leshy!"
Well… I'd wonder why you're letting players make new PCs while they're sitting your table.
I think it was suggested elsewhere that players close can back it up with chronicles as a compromise, not a stopgap replacement. For example, if you have 78 AcP in the system and are waiting on a game to be reported and have the chronicle from a game you GM'd.
...or we could just all wait until the system was finished.
And until reporting is improved none of the concerns will be solved, even when AcP is complete.
The most common answer to missing credit in this fancy new system will be "you are at the mercy of lost paperwork" or "you are subject to the whims of slow reporting — too bad!”
I feel like we can do better than that. And AcP as a concept is great! Unfortunately, it is wholly dependent on a very unreliable system. A system so unreliable, in fact, that games might not get reported unless random players photograph sign-in sheets.
I would love to see reporting smoothed out alongside AcP. And in the interim, (because building new systems takes time to get right), considering compromises.
People are ranting above about how stupid it is to not make compromises or find other solutions to a very simple privacy concern… yet, oddly, when it comes to AcP even temporary compromise or considering other solutions seems wholly out of the question.
|
|
Right now, a boon is needed to play a race not open to the general player base. If they don't have a boon, they will not play at my table.
Correct; thats the current rule. But if Paizo changes that with an interim compromise because AcP is inaccurate or too far behind schedule, then that will be the current rule and should be followed.
No one here is suggesting breaking any policies about special access. They are suggesting amending policy.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think anyone is entitled to a reward that isn't available yet, but there are some in this Forum that disagree with that.
I do think people are entitled to a reward that is available, and that they've earned credit for, but that someone else dropped the ball on.
|
|
Right now, a boon is needed to play a race not open to the general player base. If they don't have a boon, they will not play at my table.Correct; thats the current rule. But if Paizo changes that with an interim compromise because AcP is inaccurate or too far behind schedule, then that will be the current rule and should be followed.
No one here is suggesting breaking any policies about special access. They are suggesting amending policy.
If a change is made than I will follow the rule.
In case anyone was confused, I don't agree with what is being suggested.
|
Venture-Captain, Wisconsin—Franklin
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
<<begin rant>>
Wow... Did this go sideways...First, I WILL take a picture of the reporting sheet as a player. Period. I will not accept being told no.
Get over it folks and move on.
<<End rant>>
Do you know what it's like to deal with a stalker? Do you know what they'll learn about you? I'm glad you seemingly have the privilege of not being chased out of social gathering places like game stores, book stores, or coffee shops. I'm happy you've never had to deal with police when a stalker shows up at your home or having to through the process of dealing with restraining orders. Let me tell you one thing about it.
You don't just "get over it and move on."
If I player at my table told me they were taking a picture against the wishes of a player at the table with that "deal with it" attitude, I'd ask you to leave. I'm happy to discuss and to come to any number of the reasonable accommodations proposed here. If you come with that high and mighty attitude, if you're gonna stomp your feet and tell me to move on you can play somewhere else. If someone has a concern, then you need to respect their privacy and their safety or you shouldn't be running public games.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is inferred from the conversation that has been occurring.It seems to me that a lot of this is about trying to stop the AcP system from being online so that it goes to paper.Who has said this?
That is most definitely not my goal. I'm a fan of the AcP system (aside from the delays in getting it out there). I have concerns about it and what it means for getting GMs to volunteer at conventions, but it's a step in the right direction.
I just also happen to believe that there is some solution between "everyone take photos of everything" and "I see you have a chronicle that is signed with an event number, but if you don't have the full table roster for the event, there's nothing that can be done." My preferred suggestion is to allow points to go negative, but if that is not possible given the limitation of the technical team, then reporting a session with one player based off of their chronicle sheet is far preferable to me than insisting everyone start tracking everything. If someone happens to have a photo of the reporting sheet, great. Report the whole thing. If all they have is their chronicle, but it looks legitimate, the event organizer/GM isn't responding, and it passes whatever test the VO feels is reasonable, report it so they can use their points.
|
|
It seems to me that a lot of this is about trying to stop the AcP system from being online so that it goes to paper. The objections to the online system are not standing up to scrutiny. It's the 21st century.
It’s the 21st century and we’re still stuck with a deeply flawed paper-based reporting system. The backbone of AcP (swift, accurate reporting) does not stand up to scrutiny.
|
Venture-Captain, Missouri—Columbia
|
It seems to me that a lot of this is about trying to stop the AcP system from being online so that it goes to paper. The objections to the online system are not standing up to scrutiny. It's the 21st century.It’s the 21st century and we’re still stuck with a deeply flawed paper-based reporting system. The backbone of AcP (swift, accurate reporting) does not stand up to scrutiny.
We do have a flawed paper reporting system. No one has enforced the online reporting. That's going to have to change with the AcP system being online. If you want the AcP for GMing you will need to report the games. If there are errors and ommissions, Org Play is going to have to develop a system for making corrections.
I've got 59 PFS2 sessions that I have ran. Every single one is reported. Every player has their chronicle sheets. It's not difficult to do this. If someone does not want to do it, then they can delegate the task to someone else. I have 180 sessions ran as a PFS1 GM. Every session was reported on Paizo.com. Every player got their chronicle sheet. It is not that difficult. There is no excuse for not reporting the sessions.
As a VL for my area I require reporting for all sessions ran. If the GM cannot report them or is unwilling to report them, I will do it for them. It's not that hard to do. I am not finding a problem with this in my area.