Checks and Balances; a staff-related suggestion

[Calvary]

This is mostly a staff-related suggestion that has impact on the game’s future, but I wanted to suggest this because I know how hard and difficult it is to get anything done while waiting for an answer. I have no doubts that many things are on hold or may not even be escalating due to waiting for confirmation from our Server Master. So here might be a suggestion I hope you consider.

As we know, a lot of the projects have to get passed through Razmirz in order to escalate or be continued. A lot of the times, he is quite busy and these projects can be swept under the rug for weeks, or literally months, if they even get touched upon at all.

Why not have a balanced system on the team? Community suggests or proposals, or even things the community votes on, should be brought up by MOTS and Staff as a proposal. Write a written statement, a “pitch” as I like to call it. What’s the reason for the project? What’s the objective? What is the project about and why is it important? What will need to be done for this project to be completed?

This proposal is checked by a third party or mutual party (perhaps MOTS?), assuring the project is notable, within proper reason, and can be doable by whatever standards. If the third party denies it, or asks for revisions, make sure the revisions are properly attributed or carry on with another project. If the proposal is accepted, then the project may carry on.

Razmirz is allowed to veto a proposal even after all parties agreed, but his veto must be within reason. Under certain guidelines or strict and proper reason should a project be vetoed even after these parties have agreed to it. If the veto is right and just, the project will be cancelled, or revised further according to what the veto was for.

The community could even collaboratively make the requirements on why a project can be vetoed, etc.

Any revisions asked to be made, the third party should specify the problems located in the proposal and address them to the team. Any revisions based upon the veto should be addressed by Razmirz himself.

This is simply a suggestion, but I feel maybe decisions or projects may move along much more efficiently this way rather than the current system. Please feel free to suggest adjustments or anything of the sort.

[DylanCheetah]

This is mostly a staff-related suggestion that has impact on the game’s future, but I wanted to suggest this because I know how hard and difficult it is to get anything done while waiting for an answer. I have no doubts that many things are on hold or may not even be escalating due to waiting for confirmation from our Server Master. So here might be a suggestion I hope you consider.

As we know, a lot of the projects have to get passed through Razmirz in order to escalate or be continued. A lot of the times, he is quite busy and these projects can be swept under the rug for weeks, or literally months, if they even get touched upon at all.

Why not have a balanced system on the team? Community suggests or proposals, or even things the community votes on, should be brought up by MOTS and Staff as a proposal. Write a written statement, a “pitch” as I like to call it. What’s the reason for the project? What’s the objective? What is the project about and why is it important? What will need to be done for this project to be completed?

This proposal is checked by a third party or mutual party (perhaps MOTS?), assuring the project is notable, within proper reason, and can be doable by whatever standards. If the third party denies it, or asks for revisions, make sure the revisions are properly attributed or carry on with another project. If the proposal is accepted, then the project may carry on.

Razmirz is allowed to veto a proposal even after all parties agreed, but his veto must be within reason. Under certain guidelines or strict and proper reason should a project be vetoed even after these parties have agreed to it. If the veto is right and just, the project will be cancelled, or revised further according to what the veto was for.

The community could even collaboratively make the requirements on why a project can be vetoed, etc.

Any revisions asked to be made, the third party should specify the problems located in the proposal and address them to the team. Any revisions based upon the veto should be addressed by Razmirz himself.

This is simply a suggestion, but I feel maybe decisions or projects may move along much more efficiently this way rather than the current system. Please feel free to suggest adjustments or anything of the sort.

Interesting proposal Cal. I had no idea you were into this kind of thing.
But like all plans, there would need to be details worked out like:

* who should be a member of each so called group?
* what should be considered "within reason"?
* what sort of interactions should take place between said groups?

Stuff like that would need to be addressed.

[leda]

@ dylan,
True, though that's really true with any suggestion towards staff, there is always a reason/reasons to not do something or logistics to be mulled over.  The first step is taking to an idea.  Calvary/other members can't detail each little point on a roadmap, at some point common sense has to come into play.

Anyways, I think it would be a nice system if pitches and ideas were passed through multiple people and even the community more!  And if things were more like, openly discussed in community improving proposals, if an idea isn't favored, there could be more details on what needs to be done in order for everyone to be comfortable.

[Jango_Fett]

wasn't there something a while ago where there was this shadow team supposed to make sure staff stayed in line
and then it didn't work

not dissing the suggestion, i like it
i'm just trying to make sure i'm remembering that right

[Dark_heart]

I think it's good idea. Discussions about projects and plans would be really good. As Leda said, it would be nice to sometimes discuiss about patches, actualizations, etc.

[Calvary]

Sorry for the slow reply everyone! Thank you for the feedback.

I suppose “within reason” would mean anything that could impact the game in a negative way. No excuse of “just because I don’t want it” isn’t a valid excuse. Perhaps the project could possibly impact other essences of the game in a negative way, maybe it will cause too many problems in the long run. Maybe it’s a project the game itself cannot handle without tons of lag. There can be a variety of reasons!

Perhaps the MOTS can serve as a third party and would be that “group” that helps accept or deny proposals. We vote them in to speak for the community, right? I would expect them to hold that same attitude when looking over project proposals.

But to @leda, you are exactly right! I do think most ideas or proposals should be passed to the community. Perhaps the community could even serve as that “3rd party” or MOTS. Whatever the case, all ideas should really be passed to the community for speculation. I would hope that third parties would ask for revisions when it came to passing around the proposal for acceptance.

As for shadow staff I honestly have no clue, but I would hope this would work with the community having a voice and power to check. None of this has a balance currently. I would hope this could be some sort of solution.

Thank you guys for the feedback, I’d love more if possible <3

[Azurain]

I love this myself personally. It may def get more stuff done for sure....maybe.

[VortexAlive]

Red tape only slows things down that much more.

[Cilantro]

Red tape only slows things down that much more.

Explain? I don’t get what you are saying.

[DylanCheetah]

Red tape only slows things down that much more.

Explain? I don’t get what you are saying.

I believe what Vortex is trying to say, is that the more debates and voting that have to take place the longer it will take to come to an agreement. Which would mean more waiting for the community to get change.