If your average upper's time since last active in lounge's main or city chat is over 48h (CL+RHM+LHM / COUNT), drug dealers barely remember who runs your family and assume they have not maintained the clout necessary to do business with them.

Because this is based on the average, this allows any particular hand to be inactive for days while the other two hold down the fort, keeping the average between uppers below the threshold.

For example, the below has an average of 39h ((3+18+96)/3), which is below 48h:
CL: 3h ago
RHM: 18h ago
LHM: 96h ago

Another example, the below has a 53.3h ((46+18+96)/3) average, which is above 48h
CL: 46h ago
RHM: 18h ago
LHM 96h ago

Another example, the below has an 45.5h average ((40+51)/2), which is below 48h
CL: 40h ago
RHM: 51h ago
LHM: none

When selecting a family, please keep this in mind. When selecting hands, please keep this in mind. The crew details page in the crew list can give a hint at their activity, while that page's Lounge section includes other areas of lounge that are not part of this equation, if it says their last time active on lounge is 9 days, rest assured that Main and City are also at least 9 days inactive too.

Have confirmed. The only activity counted is Main/City chat so regardless of what the crew timer says if that particular hand/cl has not chatting in main and or city chat for an extended time it will still not allow access to drugs

But honestly this feels like an attempt to force activity than trying to address the issues that actually keep people from interacting in the areas.

Melancholy, can you elaborate a little more on what chain of events would happen that would cause the top 3 people who lead a family to be so turned off against the idea of being social to their members on a social game where they are supposed to be the shining examples of what the family represents? 

"All those people who work hard and will eventually die because of being in my crew - ya know, fuck 'em, they aint worth saying Hi to. Bonding? *HAH*  I can't spend 3 seconds this week on those pissants until they donate in the 9 digits".  I just can't see that being a rational thing that actually exists.  

Can you walk me through why ignoring them and intentionally excluding them from being included is a viable strategy to building a cohesive family that actually wants to be together rather than just a temporary passenger until they are killed?

This feature really is a last ditch effort before I have to make the hard decision of changing the very way families work, turning the dynamic upside down so that members are valued additions to CREATING an organization in sympatico.  Where a group of players make the choice between which organization offers the most mutually beneficial relationship that they optionally pick from, as opposed to being required to bide their time in a family that intentionally excludes the very members that could make it a family.

Literally, this is the defining moment that determines if the power to control the game and all its aspects via features and code - continues to be handed on a silver platter to a small few that get to the top at any given time - or an alternative method where everyone is a cog, and the machine is only strong when every cog has a place, purpose, and is sitting exactly where it wants to be sitting.  Undervalue your cogs, your wheel ceases to function.  Sometimes people are unable to see outside of their own narrow view, and I get that, but when I keep hearing the same complaint over and over and over about the huge chasm between the top and the bottom, I am willing to give it one final effort to show that the entire crew suffers when those at the bottom are not worth the effort of a few keystrokes from those at the time.  If that effort doesn't show that an old dog can learn new tricks, then we have to flip the source of power upside down and work it the other direction.

Melancholy, history shows that if you can gain all the rewards just off of a hidden crew chat, then thats where all the abuse happens unchecked.  When we pushed back to hold the crew leaders accountable for policing their own family if they want their family to get the rewards - there was major pushback.  Entire families, every member and upper would sit by and watch (and sometimes participate) in gaming the system to get unearned rewards. It was made abundantly clear that they it was my job to sit and monitor them to catch them, and if I didn't then they should not be held accountable for their own gains no matter how they achieve it.  Maybe I am being overly sensitive, but this is when I really lost a lot of respect for people who run families with 0 pride.  If I held the uppers accountable for knowingly and willingly allowing abuse  of the rewards system (and even participating or initiating), it kicked off huge sitewide bitchfests, I would lose tens of hours having to defend why someone should not be allowed to cheat or eagerly benefit from known cheating.

It just wasn't worth it.

But...

If you feel that we have a different more mature userbase who can take personal responsibility, I can add in the feature where you can opt your family in to start getting rewards based upon activity in their crew channel, with the caveat that they will handle all of the issues before it gets to me, and if it gets to me and its obvious that they made no reasonable effort to mitigate it and if any other average person was in their shoes faced with the same situation would have stepped in .... then we can dismantle the crew.

Talk with others in your position and let me know if this feature is worth turning on, maybe I am wrong and the uppers of today are ready for the responsibility of governing their family unlike those in the past.