RE-STRUCTURE - STAFF CONSEQUENCES (Discussion)
Jun 14, 2015 21:51:43 GMT
Vi-Poi and Bing Gan like this
Post by Hyoza on Jun 14, 2015 21:51:43 GMT
Okay, so with the re-structure vote passed, I reckon we're gonna need to do some organising within the Staff section to allow us to effectively move through Discussion, Vote, Implementation processes in here. I've got a series of provisional rules and organisational changes in mind for this, which I'd like some feedback on, so I'm gonna cover the basic changes I think we're gonna need first, and then ideas for some internal rules on how staff handle the process when it's internal to the staff.
So, first up:
So, first up:
CHANGES TO THE STAFF SECTION
First, we need to set up a sub-section to catalogue and track past decisions, just as we do with the public suggestions area now.
Thus, I suggest we create a sub-section within the Staff Board for the following:
- Past Discussions/Polls (For past discussions and votes that have taken place within the Staff Board, to be retained for reference)
- Past Implementation Threads (More on this in a bit)
- Draft Discussions (For issues you wish to discuss that have not yet found their way to the top of the list. Staff may post here and formulate their ideas, but NO Discussion should take place until their turn to be processed arrives, it is simply for drafting proposals to keep for later, speeding up the process once an issue is ready to be processed)
Now, you may notice that these sections are only for Past Threads, not current ones, "Why is that", you may ask. Well...
Thus, I suggest we create a sub-section within the Staff Board for the following:
- Past Discussions/Polls (For past discussions and votes that have taken place within the Staff Board, to be retained for reference)
- Past Implementation Threads (More on this in a bit)
- Draft Discussions (For issues you wish to discuss that have not yet found their way to the top of the list. Staff may post here and formulate their ideas, but NO Discussion should take place until their turn to be processed arrives, it is simply for drafting proposals to keep for later, speeding up the process once an issue is ready to be processed)
Now, you may notice that these sections are only for Past Threads, not current ones, "Why is that", you may ask. Well...
STAFF IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS
Now, the whole point of this re-structure is to speed up implementation and increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the process. So, I have some ideas on how we might handle the process within our (small) team going forward, to circumvent some of the issues that plague the public Suggestions area and help contribute to the previously sluggish pace of implementation.
1- ONLY ONE issue to be processed at a time
What this means is - at any one time, the Staff will be focused solely on a SINGLE issue, until it reaches completion. For example, if the Android Shop idea were to go up for Staff discussion right now, that would be our ENTIRE focus until a decision has been reached and the idea has been implemented. This encourages the team to remain focused on singular issues, and forces us to work faster on resolving them so we can move on to other matters. One problem with the previous implementation system is interest in ideas is sucked away from discussions by newer ones which touch on issues that are more relevant to recent events. If we allow this to happen within the Staff, we are going to end up building a big backlog of half-resolved issues which move further and further from our minds as newer ideas plow into the spotlight.
2- The current implementation should be the ONLY implementation within the main Staff Board
To prevent clutter, I suggest that we have CURRENT staff discussions, votes and implementation threads PINNED in the main section of the Staff Board, while older issues are moved into the aforementioned archive sub-sections once completed. This is mainly a housekeeping rule, but it also helps ensure the current issues are always immediately visible within the Staff section, rather than being squirreled away in a sub-section where people might miss them more easily.
3- NO hijacking of public Suggestions into the Staff process
One of the conditions upon which this re-structure was voted in was that the members retained their power in the public Suggestions/Updates section. To retain the integrity of that system, and maintain the trust of the players, we need to ensure that any Suggestions that originate within this area ARE NOT being taken out of member hands by the Staff for private discussion and voting.
4- We need a set procedure for ALL implementations to follow
Once again, this is kind of a housekeeping thing, but we've all seen oh-so-many threads that went to polls too early or weren't properly worded/providing the full range of options to voters. We need to go to pains to ensure we DO NOT allow this to begin happening internally before we can ever hope to chastise members for doing the same in the public section. Staff need to hold themselves to a higher standard than the members, ESPECIALLY now that we have more relative 'power' in the site-design equation. There has also been an issue on several prior occasions in the actual implementation phase. Examples include the incorrectly-released Majin profile by Koramund and the misinformation/poor-wording of other species profiles during last year's big Site Patch
The process is not intended to be restrictive or unnecessarily bureaucratic. Instead it is meant to be a set of guidelines we can all agree upon and follow mutually to ensure the Staff team does the best job it can in seeing through all implementations they work on, as quickly and as thoroughly as possible.
1- ONLY ONE issue to be processed at a time
What this means is - at any one time, the Staff will be focused solely on a SINGLE issue, until it reaches completion. For example, if the Android Shop idea were to go up for Staff discussion right now, that would be our ENTIRE focus until a decision has been reached and the idea has been implemented. This encourages the team to remain focused on singular issues, and forces us to work faster on resolving them so we can move on to other matters. One problem with the previous implementation system is interest in ideas is sucked away from discussions by newer ones which touch on issues that are more relevant to recent events. If we allow this to happen within the Staff, we are going to end up building a big backlog of half-resolved issues which move further and further from our minds as newer ideas plow into the spotlight.
2- The current implementation should be the ONLY implementation within the main Staff Board
To prevent clutter, I suggest that we have CURRENT staff discussions, votes and implementation threads PINNED in the main section of the Staff Board, while older issues are moved into the aforementioned archive sub-sections once completed. This is mainly a housekeeping rule, but it also helps ensure the current issues are always immediately visible within the Staff section, rather than being squirreled away in a sub-section where people might miss them more easily.
3- NO hijacking of public Suggestions into the Staff process
One of the conditions upon which this re-structure was voted in was that the members retained their power in the public Suggestions/Updates section. To retain the integrity of that system, and maintain the trust of the players, we need to ensure that any Suggestions that originate within this area ARE NOT being taken out of member hands by the Staff for private discussion and voting.
4- We need a set procedure for ALL implementations to follow
Once again, this is kind of a housekeeping thing, but we've all seen oh-so-many threads that went to polls too early or weren't properly worded/providing the full range of options to voters. We need to go to pains to ensure we DO NOT allow this to begin happening internally before we can ever hope to chastise members for doing the same in the public section. Staff need to hold themselves to a higher standard than the members, ESPECIALLY now that we have more relative 'power' in the site-design equation. There has also been an issue on several prior occasions in the actual implementation phase. Examples include the incorrectly-released Majin profile by Koramund and the misinformation/poor-wording of other species profiles during last year's big Site Patch
The process is not intended to be restrictive or unnecessarily bureaucratic. Instead it is meant to be a set of guidelines we can all agree upon and follow mutually to ensure the Staff team does the best job it can in seeing through all implementations they work on, as quickly and as thoroughly as possible.
THE NEW PROCESS
My proposed outline for the implementation process is as follows:
STAGE 1 - SELECTION
- When an issue is identified for implementation, it should be added to a 'To-Do List' thread. The Staff member proposing the issue may also wish to begin drafting a proposal for the issue when it eventually moves to the proposal phase.
- This list should be arranged in order of perceived priority - so for example an issue regarding the Afterlife rules would take precedence over minor tweak to Arcosian lore written in the Species profile. This is a subjective area, and I would like some input on how we decide the priority order.
- When an issue reaches the top of the To-Do List, and any outstanding issues are resolved, that issue should be moved to the Discussion Phase.
STAGE 2 - DISCUSSION
- The next top item from the Staff To-Do List should be opened up for discussion in a new, pinned thread labelled as [Discussion] in the Staff Board's main section.
- Staff should have time to discuss the issue at hand and formulate proposals/solutions. It should also be considered at this point whether opening the issue up to the playerbase in general is worthwhile/necessary.
- Once discussion has settled, and there are clearly-defined options, the issue should be moved to a vote.
STAGE 3 - VOTING
- Once a discussion is moved to voting, a new and separate [Poll] thread should be set up with appropriate options based on the relevant discussion thread. Staff should raise any queries/complaints about wording of the options or those which were made available IMMEDIATELY.
- After the agreed-upon amount of time for voting has passed (I was thinking 5 days), the poll should be locked, and the most-supported option be moved forward to the next phase.
- In the event of a tied vote, voting must remain open. Staff may continue to discuss the issue within the polling thread, until such a time as the tie is broken (changing votes should be allowed). Alternatively, the vote may be opened to the players in the public boards to break the tie.
STAGE 4 - IMPLEMENTATION
- Once an option has been voted upon, Staff should appoint one or more of their number to carry out the implementation within a new [Implementation] thread.
- Once the elected Staff have a 'workable' draft of the content for implementation prepared, it should be shared within this thread for peer review. Staff should ensure that the material reflects the results of the vote, and is formatted/presented in a way that members can easily understand, wherever possible.
- Once proposed changes are considered 'complete' by peer review, the Implementations should be posted up or otherwise put in place.
- Once this is complete, the [Discussion] [Poll] and [Implementation] Threads should be un-pinned and moved to the archive sub-sections within the Staff Board.
- Return to Stage 1.
Phew!
So, there are probably some holes, but I feel it's a solid and workable frame to use for our process going forward. This would be our first Staff Implementation Issue since the re-structure, and I'd like to hear everyone's feedback and additional ideas you feel may warrant inclusion.
STAGE 1 - SELECTION
- When an issue is identified for implementation, it should be added to a 'To-Do List' thread. The Staff member proposing the issue may also wish to begin drafting a proposal for the issue when it eventually moves to the proposal phase.
- This list should be arranged in order of perceived priority - so for example an issue regarding the Afterlife rules would take precedence over minor tweak to Arcosian lore written in the Species profile. This is a subjective area, and I would like some input on how we decide the priority order.
- When an issue reaches the top of the To-Do List, and any outstanding issues are resolved, that issue should be moved to the Discussion Phase.
STAGE 2 - DISCUSSION
- The next top item from the Staff To-Do List should be opened up for discussion in a new, pinned thread labelled as [Discussion] in the Staff Board's main section.
- Staff should have time to discuss the issue at hand and formulate proposals/solutions. It should also be considered at this point whether opening the issue up to the playerbase in general is worthwhile/necessary.
- Once discussion has settled, and there are clearly-defined options, the issue should be moved to a vote.
STAGE 3 - VOTING
- Once a discussion is moved to voting, a new and separate [Poll] thread should be set up with appropriate options based on the relevant discussion thread. Staff should raise any queries/complaints about wording of the options or those which were made available IMMEDIATELY.
- After the agreed-upon amount of time for voting has passed (I was thinking 5 days), the poll should be locked, and the most-supported option be moved forward to the next phase.
- In the event of a tied vote, voting must remain open. Staff may continue to discuss the issue within the polling thread, until such a time as the tie is broken (changing votes should be allowed). Alternatively, the vote may be opened to the players in the public boards to break the tie.
STAGE 4 - IMPLEMENTATION
- Once an option has been voted upon, Staff should appoint one or more of their number to carry out the implementation within a new [Implementation] thread.
- Once the elected Staff have a 'workable' draft of the content for implementation prepared, it should be shared within this thread for peer review. Staff should ensure that the material reflects the results of the vote, and is formatted/presented in a way that members can easily understand, wherever possible.
- Once proposed changes are considered 'complete' by peer review, the Implementations should be posted up or otherwise put in place.
- Once this is complete, the [Discussion] [Poll] and [Implementation] Threads should be un-pinned and moved to the archive sub-sections within the Staff Board.
- Return to Stage 1.
Phew!
So, there are probably some holes, but I feel it's a solid and workable frame to use for our process going forward. This would be our first Staff Implementation Issue since the re-structure, and I'd like to hear everyone's feedback and additional ideas you feel may warrant inclusion.