· Outpost 10F · Forums · Reply · Statistics · Search ·
Outpost 10F Forums / OTF v3 Ideas / Rank System Consultation
<< . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 . >>
Author Message
majin_fett
Member
# Posted: 29 Oct 2007 22:20
Reply 


Lzr: Do not forget that we also have a Fantasy division in addition to the SW and ST divisions, and then Trivia, in addition to those, has Team Trivia. More layers! \o/

Feeble
Moderator
# Posted: 29 Oct 2007 22:23
Reply 


Layers aren't necessarily a /bad/ thing as long as people can do things in people's absence by voting majority. A good system (look at /all/ good working bodies) should have a delegation system such as OTF does, but at the top is usually a council of people who make the overall difference through vote majority. If we didn't have the layers - frankly - this place would be in chaos.

kayana
Member
# Posted: 30 Oct 2007 02:38
Reply 


Quoting: skevington
my EC comrades


Comrades?

To reiterate what Lee said, the majority of the EC is up and open for change and renewal we're all just waiting on resolving some issues that are going on behind the scenes, one of which, is our beleagured server. It is fustrating for all of us, but unfortunately that's the way it is.

As Lee said, the whole point of this thread was to invite comments/constructive criticism/ideas so that the EC can be more open with OTF. We are going to try our best to make things happen and to listen to what you've said and at least this way, this is more open/honest/constructive than just debating alone on the EC list.

I might add, we've never really had this kind of thread in OTF, where people not only suggest things they'd like to change but also what they like and dont' like about OTF- we've had similar ones but not with as many responses or as full responses.

SG, I hear you on red tape but I think you're going a bit overboard. Everyone from the CiC down has work to do. We're not all shuffling feet and drinking martinis on the EC list. The reason why we have so many positions is not congratulate ourselves but because we need manpower.

As ST SC, all of the events I and the OZD have organised this year have taken a large amount of man power and last year I had to organise quite a few singlehandedly while we were deciding on a ST DSC. I can tell you, now that Lee's around, (contrary to appearance ), things are a lot easier for me because I have someone who can take over when I'm busy with RL, who can help me co-ordinate events and who can also give me feedback and suggest new ideas to help out around TF. You don't really get that with just 1 ST SC and as Aeon can testify, if left alone, I am quite able to dream up conversations in my head and forget I forgot to email them to people.

So ya, less red tape, but before we throw the baby out with the bathwater, let's identify what work we need people for.

kayana
Member
# Posted: 30 Oct 2007 02:41
Reply 


I guess the problem that makes this "red tape" so fustrating is that people see all these people in "positions" but no readily identifable work coming out of it. Well, this is one step forward, and hopefully at least, this makes it clear that we are trying to do things it's just presently being stymied!

kayana
Member
# Posted: 30 Oct 2007 02:42
Reply 


And yes, I want OTF marketed more Pheebs

buck_murray
Member
# Posted: 30 Oct 2007 03:50
Reply 


I agree with Pheebs and Kayana. It does need marketed more.

sg8472
Member
# Posted: 30 Oct 2007 05:22 · Edited by: sg8472
Reply 


Quoting: kayana
SG, I hear you on red tape but I think you're going a bit overboard.


I know you lot do stuff, but that wasn't my point. And, no, I don't feel I'm going overboard. I'm just wondering where the buck stops. How far up the ladder does something have to go before it's approved? Who has the real power in these situations? Is there a vote by the EC or is it a question of whether the CiC feels the need to veto?

I want to know if that's how it works, and if that's the reason why the EC feels just as powerless in these situations. What I'm saying is; what's the point of having so many levels if it all can be overturned by a single person?

buck_murray
Member
# Posted: 30 Oct 2007 05:33
Reply 


Quoting: sg8472
what's the point of having so many levels if it all can be overturned by a single person?


That is a very good question SG.

amandasp
Member
# Posted: 30 Oct 2007 06:05
Reply 


Quoting: sg8472
what's the point of having so many levels if it all can be overturned by a single person?


The point is that different things have to be decided at different levels. Hobbie and I can decide on something for our genre usually without needing to go up any levels. They are decided between us and the Senate. but if it's a OTF wide thing... then we send it thorugh the EC and that's usually all we need is a heads up for everyone. But if it is a change to something or an idea that affects OTF as a whole... then it needs to go up further. And sometimes, you need ideas or advice on a situation in your genre that the others can answer.

Let's not forget this is a hobby... we have many positions because no one wants to do it all. I've done that twice now with the Shuttlebay/Gateway and then the Tribune towards the end. You get burned out. Sometimes stuff does get stuck at the top because Andrew is away or Hal is getting married, but usually the chain works up to the immediate EC. These positions have been added because someone at one time was overloaded and having been there twice... I'm glad Hobbie can turn to me and I can ask the Senate for help.

sg8472
Member
# Posted: 30 Oct 2007 06:14 · Edited by: sg8472
Reply 


Yeah, but if it's an OTF-wide thing should it really be something for a single person to have the overall sway over? Or should there be some sort of vote?


And, on a side-note because it made me laugh...
Quoting: amandasp
Sometimes stuff does get stuck at the top because Andrew is away or Hal is getting married


Hehe... I love that! Reading that, it sound like Hal gets married a lot.

But also, back on point, again, if a single person can hold up the decision making process maybe a single person shouldn't have total say?

bria
Member
# Posted: 30 Oct 2007 06:35
Reply 


Andrew's said this before, and I agree with him: why do we need a group for every project? When someone has a good idea, they have to first get into a department, then get their TL to approve, then the SM, and the probably the EC as well. That's an awfully long process, by the end of which you'll probably have lost interest.

Example - do we really need the EC to approve if the TL of a team wants to redesign a website? I personally don't think so. It just wastes their time and ours. And if a non-dept. member has a good idea, they should be able to go to whatever team's responsible for that kinda thing, talk to them, and do it. I know we have a suggestion box, yeah, but that's a box, not an incentive for an individual member to actually DO something and get involved.

Departments and teams are good for regular things like Trivia, contests, newsletters and so on. But once-off things should, in my opinion, be able to run outside of these if needs be.

Y'know?

quincyw
Member
# Posted: 4 Nov 2007 03:03
Reply 


I'm first of all, going to apologise if I speak too frankly and annoy anyone. I've tried to keep it as... Respectful and pleasant as I can.

I'm going to keep this simple. Usually I launch into a lecture... Let's try and keep this short.

I'll start off with a quote from the movie Pearl Harbor: "I happen to like submariners. They don't have time for B.S.!"

The truth is, there's nothing wrong with the rank system in the sense that it's broken; and we need to find a new basis model for it. Or rather, I don't feel it's so completely out of date; and that we just need to fine tune it.

That said, the question should be why. What's the point of ranking in 10F?

So I can gain priveliges and the ability to (eventually) scale the ranks and help run/administrate this chat. My apologies or speaking so frankly, but whoop-do-doo. I can do exactly the same thing as a normal ranked chatter; or elsewhere, like Myspace (etc).

Truth is, there's quite a lot of people who could make exactly the same contributions ranked or rankless. So what do we reward them with? A lot of paperwork, a lot of hassle. All for the privelige of putting more pips on their collar and "respect".

Add to that my biggest peeve which bears out a lot of times I see the promotion lists: Good people who, for "political" or other reasons, never get promoted. Further, as someone before pointed out, those out of department may sometimes contribute as much to the chat as one inside; with helping out new people, advice and feedback.

At the end of all that, the point is, what should I be getting out of 10F. Then we should ask how we should reward those that deserve it.

buck_murray
Member
# Posted: 4 Nov 2007 03:26
Reply 


Very good points there Quincy.

polson
Member
# Posted: 4 Nov 2007 06:57
Reply 


*clamps a hand over her mouth*
*lets go for a second*
I promised not to speak anymore on this.
*clamps hand back over mouth and goes to look for some duct tape*

buck_murray
Member
# Posted: 4 Nov 2007 06:59
Reply 


Go ahead Polson... speak

rock
Member
# Posted: 12 Nov 2007 20:31
Reply 


(Warning, long winded old man speech below)

Hi,

I doubt anyone but maybe CT (thats what we used to call him) remembers me. I originaly left in 2004 but I still come by to see whats going on.

The problem with expanding the rank structure is a prety dynamic thing. On one hand, the rank structure here (which was one of the reasons I joined so many years ago) is used to stratify users which can lead to people becoming involved in order to achieve higher levels as well as a sense of responsibility and leadership. This works great as long as you have a good supply of new members coming in, which I gather seems to be one of several problems.

Once you have a core group of members and not many new ones to replace the ones being lost, you find yourself with two options. Limiting promotions to keep the rank structure balance, or promoting people and becoming too top heavy. The first option yeilds a group of people unhappy because there is no room for advancement, which is why they came and stayed in the first place. The second yeilds a group of people who are unhappy because nothing really distinguishes them from each other because they all have lots of power.

I admit I came here in due part because I enjoying progressing up through the ranks, and I was even the ISA Director at one point in time. However that did not have the staying power needed to keep me here as I really moved on in my real life.

I think this community is looking at an interesting problem with the ranks. When you build a chat room on the ability to progress through level and position and gain responsibility as a main feature (debate this as you want, I think it is one of the main and good attractions of OTF still) it is also the feature that is killing it. When I left, there were far too many levels of responsibility, effectively micro managing tasks that don't need to be. I think this is a direct result of the need to create positional authority where CL rank was absent. In my opinion, the vast majority of the leadership positions can and should be cut, and the existing leadership should be re-evaluated.

I understand that the mere suggestion will probably bring backlash, mostly from those in the position to loose something.

If there is a good core group here, eliminating the unnecessary positions will do wonders. Not just for the departments, but for the general chatting population. There is no need for QC, DSC, Senate, ATL's, ASM's,. Have one leader and the exec at each dept, then the individual team leaders. Eliminate the others. Of course there will be situations where you say, "but ____ is leaving, who will be in charge?" Be a leader and pick someone you trust for a bit. Nothing will be seriously harmed if the trivia group (this is just an example) doesn't get trivia done today...

Something that can also be considered is simplyfing the system all together. Make dept work indipendent of promotions. Have site owners (Andrew) his carefully selected (1 or 2 people at most) Admins, and then a few chat moderators to keep the peace. Those who want to contribute can still do so, they just don't need to expect to be given site access for it (I can't really see a reason why an entertainment director needs to have L4 or higher armory access, Ban editor access, etc.)

I personally don't care much for the idea of loosing all those fun toys I earned (I really did enjoy blasting lamers back in the days of CCC Security). But what purpose does it serve to have the vast majority of the members with policing power? I saw several of the posts refering to dissatisfaction with the way ISA was handling things. As former head of the ISA, I remember hearing just about everything under the sun about how the ISA abuses this, and ISA is a bunch of a-holes that. But is there really a need for them now? It all goes back to the needing of positional power in substitute of rank. My answer is no. I loved the ISA, I worked extremely hard just to make it in and get to where I did, but I think it has outlived its usefulness.


I think I should also go over re-evaluating your leaders. As a community, attitude is reflected from the top down. Some serious debate amongst the population needs to be done to decide if you want to keep these people or not. This isn't a popularity contest, but sometimes people slip through the cracks and get into positions they shouldn't be. Andrew is the ultmate decision maker as he is the owner and this is his site, but I think that the leadership could be a bit thinner (not gonna mention names).

So, take all of this as you will. It was a long post, I haven't been here for a while and some people might not like what I have to say. But trust me when I say that just adding some extra ranks isn't going to fix this HUGE problem. I think that rank, and the notion of it here at the outpost is going to have to change drasticly, and some people aren't gonna like it (mostly the ones with stuff to loose). But if you all want to survive and eventually start growing, this issue needs to be addressed first. Then you can move on to adding new stuff if you want and modernizing.

-Brian, a.k.a Rock

data
Member
# Posted: 19 Nov 2007 02:29 · Edited by: data
Reply 


Decided to put in own thread.

bordner
Member
# Posted: 9 Dec 2007 19:54
Reply 


If a new-comer's perspective counts for anything, i would like to point out that being new anywhere can be intimidating. To draw in new recruits, a structured ranking system is useful especially in guiding the new members along in learning the rules and expectations of the site. It's important to be welcoming when new people drop in, my first impression on my first entrance was a little cold at first, but some of the higher ranking officers happened to drop in and offer freindly advice. after making a few more visits to 10F, i knew this was a place that i enjoyed visiting and wanted to be a part of.
The ranking structure as it is seems appropriate, though it would probebly be helpful to have a few officers assigned to the task of orienting visitors and new recruits. perhaps adding just a few upper-echelon enlisted ranks to oversee this would work, i.e. First Sergeant and Sergeant Major.
the chat room is a fun place with some great people, i have made many freinds there in only a short time, but a stronger adherance to the chain of command might make it more attractive to those potential recruits who are more hard-core fans. Coming from military service, i have to say it takes some getting used to, to be on a first name basis with members who carry the rank of Lieutenants and Commanders. Showing respect to earned rank won't detract from being able to have fun in the chat room. As far as awarding rank in greater numbers, that might be a mistake, as it is an earned privilage, not an entitlement.
In any case, i would be wary on anyone who was hungry just to put stripes on their sleeves. The true purpose, i would think, would be to simply meet great people and have fun in the chat room. The second goal we should all have in mind, is that if we value 10F for what it is, then how can each of us contribute to its well-being? what have we done to make it more successful? Take a few minutes of your day and talk it up with people you know, post a note in the local market. advertise. Recruit. support. We will succeed as a team, regardless of what title or rank we may hold. We are in this together. And boy, did i just get preachy, or what ?

lzrman
Member
# Posted: 9 Dec 2007 21:11
Reply 


Well Said Bordner You are a welcomed addition to the community and I see lots of promise having you as a prospective member.

kayana
Member
# Posted: 10 Dec 2007 05:19
Reply 


I remember you rock

Thanks guys for all of your comments!

Kayana

dpo
Member
# Posted: 2 Jan 2008 10:47
Reply 


the problem i have with the OTF system is the way its choking you...

i know people have been saying that numerous times but i spent the last few hours trying to think of how i could best support that.

I remember back when i first started OTF, it was alot more RP and fun, people would have pillow fights or food fights in Tenforward. when i got to CL4 me and a friend of mine were gonna have a phaser fight, if we did that now would we be banned for abuse? Probly. but now it seems like all about the promotion, i joined a Dept a long time ago just because i wanted the Promotion, i wanted everyone to say Congrats and all that. it shouldnt be about that at all. people behind the scenes are working really hard yes, but do they even go into the Chat room to enjoy their work? one person i used to talk to did alot of Dept work, and he told me that he hadnt been in the chat room for almost a year and a half...this is ment to be a Community Sci-fi site...dropping the theme would only drop interest. everyone is right when they are talking about the members who have been here for 10 years...spend hours on end in the chat room...they arnt acknowledged for being there 10 years, unless i look in their dossier, i wouldnt have known if they joined six months ago or six years ago, i mean, their only CL4 who cares how long they've been here, its not like they are contributing to the site. it shouldn't be that way though. everyone whether they joined 6 months ago or six years ago shouldn't be working their off for that promotion, people should be having fun in the chat room. they should be enjoying themselves and not worry about whether they are CL4 or CL7. my Goals in this place have changed so many times, origionally i was here to have fun, then its all about the Rank and now after my leave of Absence, i come back to find that my goal of the Rank, is exactly what everyones been fighting over this whole time...the chat rooms are dead because if they arnt getting the special privlages to do anything cool in there, why bother?. if a lamer comes into the chat, how many ISA's are sitting with their hand on the Trigger already? who runs from the spycam to warn, then kick....then run back to the spycam...if the ISA lost their power to watch over the Chats in the spycam, ISA's wouldnt be able to do their job cause theyd actually have to go sit in the chat room...and u know they wouldnt wanna do that...

My 2 Cents...enjoy

lzrman
Member
# Posted: 2 Jan 2008 13:27 · Edited by: lzrman
Reply 


I just think we should get rid of the spycam, just my 2 cents. Maybe add an option to switch chatrooms with a single session login.

buck_murray
Member
# Posted: 2 Jan 2008 15:25
Reply 


DPO,

You said a lot of good things there. I agree with just about all of it. I joined loving this place, and I also wanted that Promotion as well, never happened and 'almost' learned to deal with it. But after 10+ years that I have been here, that promotion, if it ever does come, I will know that it has been long overdue and I personally will believe that I deserved it.

I also agree to be done with the Spycam, back in the day I was able to use it for a few months but was stripped of that privelage. I thought it was fun but it also was pretty bad, like you said, it is a Community... and I don't believe that is part of the community.

My two cents!

lzrman
Member
# Posted: 2 Jan 2008 15:36
Reply 


The spycam, if you want people to be part of a community you cannot have them not participating in the community by being there in person.

polson
Member
# Posted: 2 Jan 2008 16:34
Reply 


I personally only use the spycam for ISA duties (i.e. keeping tabs on multiple chats). I think it's a good thing to have for those reasons, but not as a method to lurk.

buck_murray
Member
# Posted: 2 Jan 2008 19:18
Reply 


Thinking about it more and more, and taking into consideration Polson's post, the Spycam should only be used for ISA purposes. Why whould it be there for any other reason? I know it is fun and all... just saying.

majin_fett
Member
# Posted: 2 Jan 2008 19:40
Reply 


As I mentioned before, maybe the spycam wouldn't be needed if we cut down on the number of chatrooms...?

Of course, we've all talked about this before...

dpo
Member
# Posted: 2 Jan 2008 20:56 · Edited by: dpo
Reply 


yea the Spycam seems to be such a power hungry thing. i *poke* the spycam everytime im in the chatrooms...i have no idea whos in there...and when a lamer comes into the chatroom, i dont know if theres anyone even watching from the spycam to do anything about it. and if the spycam is ment to be used to uphold the rules and stuff, for all i know, no ones there. thats another thing ive waited on, the only reason i wanted to get up to a higher CL, is to experiance the Spycam, to sit on the other side. maybe the reason the chatrooms are starting to fall is because people are losing hope of ever getting to experiance everything within this system, when i left OTF i never thought id come back, i gave up hope of ever seing OTF HQ, ever getting a high rank, ever doing anything super appreciated, but now when i come back i realize that just talking with all the amazing people here....that was me appreciating the time ive spent here...i went into the chatroom, and after 20 mins i was sitting at my desk laughing and enjoying it...its not about all the work or the features...its about having fun and meeting people...Chat Rooms are for CHATting...

2 cents or a nickel

Edit: i also remember when the MT first came around, after the first few months it felt like if u wernt a higher CL u wernt welcome, i would enter the chat and they would treat me like i was a CL2 Lamer or something, i feel that the Chat rooms are equal, i think everyone really does, if u made one chat room, is there a time were i shouldnt go in because im not a high CL? cause that isnt a community then...i feel thats one thing that is also pushing people away, once people seem to get up the CL levels...they kinda get all Snotty, kinda like u see some High Class Rich people get to were everyone is lower and they should be treated that way.

cleo_soul
Member
# Posted: 6 Feb 2008 02:07
Reply 


If I was in ISA I'd only use it for ISA duties, nothing more and if I ever got to the CL for access to the spycam I probably wouldn't use it because I like to come in and hang out in the chat room instead.

master_chief
Member
# Posted: 28 Apr 2008 23:54
Reply 


What really needs to be looked at here is 1. Group dynamics and 2. Marketing.. survey people who are here, a formal survey if you will and secure reasoning as to why they enter the chat and what things they like the most.

<< . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 . >>
Your reply
Bold Style  Italic Style  Underlined Style  Image Link  URL Link     :) ;) :P :( :K :D :D ... Disable smileys


» Username  » Password 
Only registered users can post here. Please enter your login/password details before posting a message.
 
Page loading time (secs): 0.051
Online now: Guests - 3
Members - 0
Most users ever online: 215 [30 Aug 2017 14:12]
Guests - 215 / Members - 0
Powered by: miniBB™ © 2001-2020