Toribash
Original Post
S+I Board Reshuffle Jamberoo Extreme Plus 2.0 :: The Revenge of the S+I board
S+I board is really fuck right now I mean look at this thread huh I bet you forgot about that one already - even though hampa said he was gonna do it like who even knows?? In a nutshell: S+I board needs a rework.

Why:

Jamming all 2 billion ideas into one board is really sub-optimal because it hides a ton of decent information and makes the board tiresome to read through at best - for users and more importantly for devs and staff.

Furthermore, a cleaner system promotes communication and transparency - you can see what has been ignored, if devs are seeing what you're suggesting, whether the relevant staff are actually discussing your ideas for so-and-so board. Rather than SkulFuk appearing and saying 'yeah sounds good' followed by potential radio silence, clearer and more organised communication/action will be observable by everyone involved. Did you guys even know gynx is our community manager? Because he's not that was a myth


How:

S+I becomes its own section (like Clans or Market). Within this section, we get three boards:
  • Game Dev
  • Site Dev
  • Community
Each board has an 'Approved' subforum.

People post ideas in the relevant board, and when an idea is approved for development it is moved from the board into the board's Approved subforum and tagged:
  • [Pending]
  • [InDev]
  • [Implemented] -- should be closed also

I think this is healthier than simple post tagging because things which are pending/indev won't suspiciously disappear off the first page to never be seen again - the lifetime of a suggestion will be far more apparent.
Last edited by Fear; Oct 9, 2016 at 06:07 PM.
Who is it decided by and how is it determined which suggestions will be moved to the Approved subforum?

Obviously, you'd think someone like Gynx (our community manager) is meant to be in charge of this board, but clearly he doesn't think so. It might be worth having each subforum have its own 'leader' who browses the ideas and decides which ideas to elevate (you know, so shit actually gets done).

If we want to be more democratic about things, then we should instead require new threads to come with polls with agree/disagree options. If the idea gets over a certain number of agree votes, and there's proportionally a much higher amount of people voting yes on the idea, then that idea should get moved to the Approved section.

Imo, we could structure this board in the perfect way and have this really incredible system, but it means shit-all if there's nobody competant and energised willing to run it the way it should be run, it's all for naught - Different car, same shitty driver.

To sum up, the big issue is the lack of the central authority figure who's meant to be in charge of this board. There's nobody around here who's decision-making. That's why this board is so clogged and useless.

I support your idea, but it won't work if nobody gives a shit again and there's inactive leadership. So I'd suggest implementing a method that reduces the perceived necessity of the community manager (by hiring capable 'subcommunity' managers (Site, game, community)) or by giving more power to the people instead (with the I agree/disagree votes).
Last edited by Ele; Sep 29, 2016 at 05:05 AM.
Originally Posted by Ele View Post
If we want to be more democratic about things, then we should instead require new threads to come with polls with agree/disagree options. If the idea gets over a certain number of agree votes, and there's proportionally a much higher amount of people voting yes on the idea, then that idea should get moved to the Approved section.

Originally Posted by Ele View Post
I support your idea, but it won't work if nobody gives a shit again and there's inactive leadership. So I'd suggest implementing a method that reduces the perceived necessity of the community manager (by hiring capable 'subcommunity' managers (Site, game, community)) or by giving more power to the people instead (with the I agree/disagree votes).

Sure, but not everything the community wants is either doable (20 player tb PLEAS HAMAP) or (in SOME cases) even healthy. Polls are nice but I'd rather the sub-community managers be the ones who approve/dissaprove, by their own intelligence but also by communicating with the devs and staff who would be necessary to implement such a change. Forcing this interaction brings devs out from the shadow realm which they currently reside in and connects them with the community through the managers - bolstering activity and interest on both sides.
Originally Posted by Gynx View Post
Oddly a discussion regarding this happening in ToriPrime also, here's a suggestion I have regarding the tags/general management of the board as it might spruce the place up a bit. The notion of splitting up boards/making new ones tends to be a fickle topic so we'd probably need more of a consensus on that.


EDIT: Feel free to chop and change this as much as you like by the way, and I'll also chase up your previous suggestion. One thing you have to appreciate is development cycles aren't very quick and you came in during the middle of a modmaker overhaul. These things take time.

This was pretty much how I was already moderating this board bar elevating the good ones to you. I think it's a good idea overall and it really prevents a clutter of dumb ideas from being everpresent.
If we want to keep the system the way it's structured now, that would be a good way to do it. If we roll with Fear's suggestion though, then none of that becomes necessary (since suggestions would already be classed by the subforum they're in).

The bold prioritisation tags could be somewhat automated if we really want to or we could just manually add the tags easily without any coding. Fear's idea of having a subforum in each section devoted to approved/in-dev suggestions would also work well I think.
Last edited by Ele; Oct 10, 2016 at 08:38 AM.
More comunication to the devs and understanding how difficult or simple an idea is to implement would be a lot better. We could learn how stuff works around here and a ton of impossible ideas would be avoided.
= SELLING MARKET INVENTORY =
Pm me for deals
Originally Posted by suomynona View Post
I prefer the option with that results in the least boards, because we already have a LOT of boards. I'm also of the opinion that having all of the suggestions available in a single board means that opportunity glances might result in a dev who wouldn't ordinarily have looked at a suggestion saying "Hrm, that might actually be neat, can I make it happen?"

Boards are a lot more complicated than tags, and I don't believe automated tagging is particularly necessary. Anything that's going to get a mod tag should be getting the at least 5 minutes of attention it deserves anyways, and what does another 30 seconds of clicking really mean in that case?

No, I think that's the weakest response in this thread so far. S+I board is pretty abysmal and the only reason more people aren't complaining is because it's been abysmal for maybe years now and they've given up on any change happening (is that ironic?).

More boards being bad is subjective as all hell and I don't think its a concern that even entered the head of anybody ever. I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive or rude but I really hate your reasoning. Your first point clearly doesn't work at all - dev/community reform work is almost nonexistent and the way things are currently is proven to be not helping. Would a rework of S+I help? I don't know, nobody can know that, but what is evident is that what we currently have is shoddy and would be just as effective if it was removed entirely.

You're even against the auto-tagging? Something that would let devs sift through filler and find the areas they want to work on is a bad idea? For example Lite is currently doing a lot of work on clans, and shev is focusing mostly on the torishop features. There are no devs right now who are so ridiculously active to be taking on several projects at once, and unfocused dev time is bad enough even if it were possible.

I really can't see where your stance on this is founded.
Originally Posted by suomynona View Post
To clarify: Users will be REQUIRED to choose a tag when posting. It will be against the rules to choose an invalid tag. This is the level of automated tagging I am proposing.

Edit:
Another particular advantage is that if a dev wants us to formally add a specific tag type, e.g. [Clan] or [ToriShop], we can do so. We can do so in 5 minutes with essentially no chance of fucking up permissions, of moving threads to the wrong place, or of making the system in any way more complicated or easier to break in the future.

Regardless of anything else, I think this should be implemented for now. I'm gonna ask shev to tell us his opinion as a dev, which is probably the opinion that actually matters in all of this. Obviously your experience managing the community is important too, and your concerns about the subboards make a lot of sense.
Last edited by Fear; Oct 13, 2016 at 12:26 PM.
I would be down for anything that makes S&I board more systematic with the least amount of effort. As of now, the best way of doing that seems to be through categorizing with tags.

I like the idea of tags, and I would rather make tag labels general than specific. Totally agree that tags should be mandatory. Automation is not needed here, and, once again, it aligns well with least effort approach.
So there's no tag that tells the community if an idea is actually being worked on. All we know is that devs are aware of it ([Elevated]) and whether the it's been implemented or won't be ([Implemented]/[Will Not Be Implemented]). That's a pretty big thing to leave out so I asked suo.

irc


So I clearly don't think there's a valid reason as to why we're missing an [In-Dev] tag, and I really don't think we're asking for too much.

Whatchu think, community?
-------
Also [Event] tag is kinda redundant since it events fit snugly within the realm of the [Community] tag, dontcha think? No need to make some inane distinction.
Last edited by Ele; Oct 14, 2016 at 05:55 AM.