- Are there some standards for a game (specifically Survivor) that we could agree to? For example, if we had a set of requirements (a Survivor game should not cross-tribe communication, a game should have at least one way of swapping players prior to the merge, a game should not have a Legendary Box, etc.) that a game must adhere to, or else describe itself as somewhat bastard?
Survivor is a Mish Mash game on this site. Limiting a moderator's ruleset options would be restrictive and creatively limiting. Players can make educated decisions based off of a game's ruleset as to whether or not they will enjoy the game.
The point of a queue system is to promote game health by encouraging orderly cooperation,
not
to stifle game creators' options. I agree that an organized, maintained list of games coming up is a great idea. Messing with the point of Mish Mash is not.-
I would like propose that an
optional
review committee be formed of past game moderators. Review would not be a mandatory measure when joining the queue, however, should the game meet the reviewers' standards of approval the prospective moderator can point to the groups' consent as a sign of baseline quality.It is likely that quite a few of the potential candidates for this type of committee would also wish to participate regularly. This means that a committee would require multiple participants that could each personally opt out of reviewing announced games at their own discretion.