Administrators: Special RP Requests.

[n00bl3t]

Well, I was thinking, which is never a good thing in the eyes of many, and I realised something.

What that something is, or was, depending on your reference frame, is irrelevant, but the result will be two quotes from a similar topic, accompanied by some text. (With this being some of the text, along with another bit.)

There is one Special RP sub-forum.

Within it, there are three further-sub forums.

One is called "Approved Requests", it is unlocked, visible and free for people to post in, and as the name suggests contains approved requests.

The second is called "Denied Requests", it is unlocked, visible and free for people to post in, and as the name suggests contains denied requests.

The third is called "Pending Requests", it is unlocked and visible, but not free for people to post in, and as the name suggests contains requests being reviewed for a decision.

When someone posts an SRP request, it goes into "Pending Requests".

I should mention the fact that in my proposed system, faction leaders are still the only ones that can post, however, they must name who they are posting for.

Now, I would like to know how this is spammed, or how the Administration would have to do astronomical book-keeping.

Another thing that should be mentioned is, sanction sub-forum rules apply.

That is, for example, posting something in the approved requests like "you are wrong, OoRP and do not deserve this" will get you in trouble. (However, posting something asking for a clarification of someone's actions in-game, or evidence that they no longer deserve the SRP will be allowed.)

In the denied requests, for example posting something like "you suck" or "you will never get it" will get you in trouble. (However, constructive criticism such as "this is what you need to do so that getting your request approved is more likely" will be allowed.)

I could type more and how this system works better than the current one, but I will respond to posts as they come along.

---

Anything I say is not intended as offensive, and to try and deliberately misinterpret it as such would be an attempt at trolling via misrepresentation.

It's not a conspiracy, it's localised bias. They're not intelligent enough to form a conspiracy.

[swift]

I am putting my little illiterate signature X under the text of this thread.

---

<span style="font-familyalatino Linotype">

<span style="color:#000000">All morons hate it when you call them a moron.

</span></span>

<span style="color:#33FFFF">The CFF</span>

<span style="color:#33FF33">CFF Communication Channel and RP Collection</span>

[schlurbi]

I think the current System is better.

---

"Who is it doing this synthetic type of alpha beta psychedelic funkin'?"

[n00bl3t]

I think the current System is better.

I am tempted to ask you to explain why you think so.

---

Anything I say is not intended as offensive, and to try and deliberately misinterpret it as such would be an attempt at trolling via misrepresentation.

It's not a conspiracy, it's localised bias. They're not intelligent enough to form a conspiracy.

[Treewyrm]

The second is called "Denied Requests", it is unlocked, visible and free for people to post in, and as the name suggests contains denied requests.

Making denied requests is to call popularity contest and/or flaming request. What purpose would it serve if request is denied anyway and no way to revert it? It's end of the road.

Either way I don't like the proposed variant. Keep it all locked, optionally visible if needed, otherwise it's just call for trolling, public condemnation and all assorted nastiness this forum is quite popular about.

For constructive criticism I find PMs more appropriate, person-to-person without public getting in a way or catering posts for public opinion and, most commonly, trying to persuade public to support or not this or that. If a person has a problem posting constructive criticism in PM I suspect that person is not interested in providing honest and constructive opinion in the first place, instead motivated by something else and not good intentions.

[n00bl3t]

Making denied requests is to call popularity contest and/or flaming request. What purpose would it serve if request is denied anyway and no way to revert it? It's end of the road.

Either way I don't like the proposed variant. Keep it all locked, optionally visible if needed, otherwise it's just call for trolling, public condemnation and all assorted nastiness this forum is quite popular about.

How is it a popularity contest and/or flaming request? (Specifically explain how the two can happen under my proposed system.)

Some things will not change while others will. A lack of change in this area, does not mean there are not changes in others.

Edit:

Well, perhaps denying anyone but whose request it is the right to post in the denied requests is the way to go. My proposal is just that, a proposal, and it may need tweaking.

Perhaps PM's are better.

My proposal aims to bring about a tad more efficiency and transparency.

---

Anything I say is not intended as offensive, and to try and deliberately misinterpret it as such would be an attempt at trolling via misrepresentation.

It's not a conspiracy, it's localised bias. They're not intelligent enough to form a conspiracy.

[Treewyrm]

How is it a popularity contest and/or flaming request? (Specifically explain how the two can happen under my proposed system.)

Just like any other flame threads spur up at the forums now and then fairly often. You rely on others (moderators/admins) cleaning up mess which I doubt they'd happy to add to their burden and give ammunition for others to call bias. Plus there are plenty vultures who can hide flaming behind seemingly okay post balancing on the edge while not passing the threshold where it is clearly flaming.

Edit: I fail to see how is that "more efficient". Efficient by exactly what parameters? Response time? Nope - it is still admins that decide. Having request more clear? There is already form to fill, so increasing effectiveness here is dubious as well.

[n00bl3t]

Just like any other flame threads spur up at the forums now and then fairly often. You rely on others (moderators/admins) cleaning up mess which I doubt they'd happy to add to their burden and give ammunition for others to call bias.

In the denied requests, for example posting something like "you suck" or "you will never get it" will get you in trouble. (However, constructive criticism such as "this is what you need to do so that getting your request approved is more likely" will be allowed.)

Call bias? It seems to be considered a dirty word on this forum, along with conspiracy.

Frankly, making the system more transparent makes the system less bias. (And makes any bias more apparent, helping eliminate it.)

---

Anything I say is not intended as offensive, and to try and deliberately misinterpret it as such would be an attempt at trolling via misrepresentation.

It's not a conspiracy, it's localised bias. They're not intelligent enough to form a conspiracy.

[Treewyrm]

Frankly, making the system more transparent makes the system less bias. (And makes any bias more apparent, helping eliminate it.)

One does not always result in the other. Bias isn't universal, as easily observed from this forum it is often locked onto a personal perspective, yours not excluding. What seem a bias for one may not be for another and so forth. I find these attempts to find universal unbiasness futile, at best idealistic, at worst waste of time and dragging the place further down into flaming. Propose something that is more rigid and strong enough to address the practical issues rather than catching ideals without additional reliance on people who already as it is got enough to take care of without you adding more to their responsibilities.

[n00bl3t]

Edit: I fail to see how is that "more efficient". Efficient by exactly what parameters? Response time? Nope - it is still admins that decide. Having request more clear? There is already form to fill, so increasing effectiveness here is dubious as well.

It is more efficient as people can see where there requests are. (Perhaps another sub-forum labelled "currently being decided", or people just drawing conclusions from the pending requests how many more until their's comes up.

That would avoid the threads we have seen on the forums asking for whether the SRP was recevied, what was the verdict and so on. (Along with the PM's and skype messages.)

When people can see what they have written, and the actual work of the Administrators, they are reassured.

It also makes the system more trustworthy. (Which quashes fear of bias and accusations and so on.)

---

Anything I say is not intended as offensive, and to try and deliberately misinterpret it as such would be an attempt at trolling via misrepresentation.

It's not a conspiracy, it's localised bias. They're not intelligent enough to form a conspiracy.