Poll
Question:
Which method do you want for writing the story?
Option 1: Single Elected Writer
Option 2: Multiple Elected Writers for one story
Option 3: Multiple Elected Writer writing multiple stories to vote on
Option 4: Single Designated Writer
Option 5: Multiple Designated Writers for one story
Option 6: Multiple Desginated Writers writing multiple stories to vote on
Pick one to make things more official.
"Designated" means the leader picks.
Anything else to discuss?
"Multiple Elected Writer writing multiple stories to vote on"
You mean, the choice that got us to where we are right now?
Quote from: bb1 on December 13, 2009, 08:09:42 PM
"Multiple Elected Writer writing multiple stories to vote on"
You mean, the choice that got us to where we are right now?
I think the plan should be that whoever writes it, everyone in the universe doesn't get the vote. Those who are knowledge should. And from the first round we have an idea of what people want in general.
this is just for who writes it
should we have multiple elected writers to write multiple stories, a few questions:
A. How many writers will we have?
B. Will they be writing completely new stories or sticking with the main idea of the current one?
C. Is there a possibility to veto?
Oh lawd, another poll. What's wrong with just some people writing stories and putting them forward?
Quote from: Shadow Knight on December 13, 2009, 08:53:54 PM
Oh lawd, another poll. What's wrong with just some people writing stories and putting them forward?
We did that last time. And there was far too much content to really combine. People who lacked popularity might not have had their stories read and thus voted on, and there was a lot of idea forming going on in each thread.
This thread bothers me, because I had planned to do committee member selection in this way
1) We would allow anyone to apply for the story committee (if they are willing to do a lot of reading)
2) We would then post their name in the private CP
3) Modders and project leaders would have the opportunity to bring up any objections to having them on the committee
4) If no objections, or objections are successfully resolved, then we allow that person to go onto the story committee
Once the story committee is formed, they will have the options to select even multiple stories for consideration by the CP (for example a 'main' storyline, with contributions by other story writers.) After writing team selection, the committee will provide feedback to the main story writer and contributors, to better integrate these ideas into the CP. This would be an ongoing task -- and even if a story wasnt selected as the main one, it would still be possible for other people to get into the CP as contributing writers.
I know that it would work well this way, because I know the project members are perfectly willing to work with each other on these matters with minimal infighting. And through these we can arrive at good decisions.
Ok. What ZA's proposing is what's happening. No more polls, there will be a thread for nominations (Stress nominations, not volunteers). Nominees will have the opportunity to decline if they so choose. If they accept, their name will be circulated around the CP leaders, and a final decision will be made as to their standing in the committee.
Any objections?
Who could nominate whom? I suggest that anyone could nominate anyone. Would you be able to nominate yourself = volunteer?
You can nominate anyone, but cannot nominate yourself (hence the "not volunteers" part).
I'm thinking about two things here
ZA's suggestion #1) We would allow anyone to apply for the story committee (if they are willing to do a lot of reading)
My sugquestionrant #2) Essentially, all of the nominations are going to be approved by the leaders, so why the "no volunteering" bit? It doesn't matter whether someone's nominated or volunteered really since the leaders are going to filter the candidates to acceptable ones anyway. The only reason I can see (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) for the "no volunteering" bit is that it forces people to justify other members' of the community's previous contributions publicly in order to get them past the selection by the mods. But, what that leaves us with is basing the selection on committee members on past performance only -- not taking into account business over break, etc. (Of course someone can decline for reasons like "Oh, I'm too busy over break," but under the regulations VSMIT suggested you couldn't volunteer, even if you had an inordinate amount of free time over break.) If no one nominates me than it doesn't matter how much effort I'd be willing and able to put in with this stage of the project and at this particular time. (Just using me as an example, "me" could be anybody). What that leaves us with is a system where someone who doesn't know the particular intricacies of someone's life (nominator) has to recommend someone (nominee) to a post. While that person can decline, it doesn't leave room the other way: the person cannot say "Hey, I have an inordinate amount of free time coming up. I'd like to do some BZ21.3CP reading". Now I wouldn't suggest that the story committee be comprised of every member of the community, but I do put forth the idea that we open nominations to allow for self-nominations: let the person with the most intimate details of his or her life be able to decide whether he or she is worthy of nomination.
The reason why I have it set to be nominations and not volunteers is so that people need to have a pretty solid reason for nominating someone.
For instance, I could nominate you right now, based on the fact that you seem to be pretty level-headed and would be good at playing devil's-advocate. I won't nominate you, though, simply because I'm running the thing. If someone else would like to nominate you, based on those two opinions, it would be accepted.
People don't have to have a long, drawn out reason why. It just should be meaningful. Also, there is absolutely nothing stopping someone from asking another person to nominate them.
Ah, ok. I guess for whatever reason I assumed that nomination would have to come with story-related data to back it up (as in, Mr. X wrote a fantastic storyline already), etc. I word that ;)
Also, should this poll be closed?
Poll is now locked, the thread will remain open because it can be used to discuss the nomination idea.
Right now we are accepting nominations for people to be on the committee. Is the committee going to write the story or will the committee be judging submitted stories?
Likely a bit of both.
Actually, it would be better for people to only nominate ONE person and describe why. Other worthy candidates should still be nominated. This would prevent everyone in the community from being a nominee in the project and lower the amount of screening that the CP members have to do for committee members. I mean, if enough people think that one person would be good for the task, they should get at least ONE nomination which would be enough to bring it to discussion. Ideally this committee should be small, like perhaps 4 or 5 members.
I back ZA. Only one nomination per nominator.
I also agree, anything else to discuss?