Updated Mod Eligibility Rules

[zoraster]

thumbs up.

Question: are there any requirements for first time mods? Do they still need 3 months of experience on site + a completed game?

[zoraster]

thumbs up.

Question: are there any requirements for first time mods? Do they still need 3 months of experience on site + a completed game?

Personally, I'd prefer 6 months + IC status as the requirements for first time mods. I don't know if others would agree with me here.

I'd be okay with the IC status thing, but 6 months seems unnecessary given that it takes a number of months to get through the mini normal queue. As a result, a six month requirement would make it so that the earliest anyone ever modded a game was 9 months to a year after they started playing, and i don't know that we really gain that much from doing that.

[zoraster]

I'd be okay with the IC status thing, but 6 months seems unnecessary given that it takes a number of months to get through the mini normal queue. As a result, a six month requirement would make it so that the earliest anyone ever modded a game was 9 months to a year after they started playing, and i don't know that we really gain that much from doing that.

I haven't done any extensive research on this, but I think of all the new players that come through, many don't make the 3 month bracket, with the scale gradually sliding down in the 3-6 month category, and even more in 6+ month category. I expect that bumping the wait time to 6 months would minimise the queue in the long run by a couple of months, changing the overall structure to be; wait 6 months + 2/3, rather than wait 3 months + 4/5.

Of all the new, first time mods that come through the Normal Review Group, there have been some wildly unbalanced games and some wildly inexperienced players who don't get how and why things work here. Even coming from another site, our culture is significantly different, to the point where it must take at least 5-10 games to get accustomed and have any basic understanding of our game. 6 months + 5 games completed seems like a good threshold to me to ensure more knowledgeable mods come through, so we're not designing their game for them. There are a lot of mods who /in on the first day of being eligible and do little in the time they're waiting. Designing their game at this stage of their understanding isn't going to produce well-balanced or fun games.

I don't think 6 months is overly harsh. Modding is a privilege, and a service to the community, not a right. Playing is always more important, and I don't see why it's unfair to disallow someone who has only played a game once to give it a shot.

But I don't think that's a function of time on the site, at least not directly. It's a function of getting involved. If you institute you must qualify for IC status as well as been here three months, you'd already have fulfilled what you're going for.

---
And no. Mods shouldn't be running two large games at a time. There's just no need for it. We aren't in need of more large games. Just run one at a time. It can be frustrating to wait when you think you have a great second idea, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

[zoraster]

would you think "special games" as defined here would require

there

their own forum?


EDIT: SDFASDFSDFASDFASDFADWFASDFASDFASDF GRAMMAR!!!

probably depends on the special quality of it. For example the California Trilogy did (though I'm still not clear what that game was), but the /in-vitationals and Team Mafia will not.

[zoraster]

I'd be okay with the IC status thing, but 6 months seems unnecessary given that it takes a number of months to get through the mini normal queue. As a result, a six month requirement would make it so that the earliest anyone ever modded a game was 9 months to a year after they started playing, and i don't know that we really gain that much from doing that.

I haven't done any extensive research on this, but I think of all the new players that come through, many don't make the 3 month bracket, with the scale gradually sliding down in the 3-6 month category, and even more in 6+ month category. I expect that bumping the wait time to 6 months would minimise the queue in the long run by a couple of months, changing the overall structure to be; wait 6 months + 2/3, rather than wait 3 months + 4/5.

The research here would simply be seeing how many first-time mods flake in queue. If there aren't many - and when I joined that wasn't the case, but I don't know how it is now - then this would be a bad idea.

Playing is always more important, and I don't see why it's unfair to disallow someone who has only played a game once to give it a shot.

...which is the idea behind IC status.

Flake from the queue or flake from the game, Vi? Because flaking from the queue isn't bad, although a bit annoying for the listmod. Flaking from the game is obviously terrible. I don't recall many instances of mod flaking their first game though. But I'm admittedly more plugged into the repeat-player repeat-mod scene of themes.

[zoraster]

Firstly I think how good someone is, is very subjective and your own opinion of yourself may be wildly different from other peoples opinions. Take vezok for example...

I don't really see the need to lengthen or shorten the current rules, having said that I agree with Hoopla more than anyone else here.

Except that Hoopla is arguing for the most draconian of rule changes?

But yeah, I agree a good player is not the same as a good mod, but we're not really asking mods to be GOOD, just experienced and knowledgeable and "fit" with our culture.

[zoraster]

Actually thinking about it, maybe it would be better to require mods to mod an open before they can mod a mini normal. That would give mods experience before they dive in to attempt to mod a game with their own setup. (Which would increase the requirements to modding a normal game, and keep the requirements for being able to be a first time mod the same.)

I think the value of this is pretty low. The know on most new mods is they aren't creating balanced setups or are creating inappropriate setups (e.g. cult in a normal game), not that they aren't doing a good job with vote counts and the mechanical side, but I could be wrong. The setup review process stems the worst of that, I would think.

I'm not a fan of simply creating obstacles for new mods just for the sake of it. It takes a long time to mod your first game and that's fine, but making it longer before mods can run theme games doesn't necessarily improve them.

[zoraster]

So choosing from a list of games and seeing what is considered balanced has no value for potential mods?

To clarify, I'm not advocating creating a new layer of mod obstacles. I'm advocating raising the requirements for normal games to be closer to that of themes. (It would seem to eliminate a lot of the problems Hoopla is talking about.)

First, my understanding of the open queue is mods are basically given the game they're supposed to run.

Second, yes. I think it has little value and is unlikely to increase the quality of moderation in normal games or beyond.

[zoraster]

So choosing from a list of games and seeing what is considered balanced has no value for potential mods?

To clarify, I'm not advocating creating a new layer of mod obstacles. I'm advocating raising the requirements for normal games to be closer to that of themes. (It would seem to eliminate a lot of the problems Hoopla is talking about.)

First, my understanding of the open queue is mods are basically given the game they're supposed to run.

Not anymore. (I'm not sure if there was ever a time that mods were refused from picking if they asked.)

Second, yes. I think it has little value and is unlikely to increase the quality of moderation in normal games or beyond.

Weren't you the one who made that model mini normal thread?

Ah okay

And yes, I was. But my point wasn't to make mods do anything, but to give those who want them a template to work off of rather than starting from scratch or using a possibly flawed previous game that mod had played.

[zoraster]

Sorry when I said I didn't expect them to be good I meant good PLAYERS but somehow left out that crucial word

[zoraster]

Actually, removing the open queue as something that gives mod experience toward running a large or a theme isn't a bad idea (grandfather this in so that those currently in the queue don't get screwed). It would have the following consequences:

1. The open queue would likely empty a lot. In fact, it'd probably resemble the newbie queue with how many mods are signed up, possibly lacking a mod from time to time. But that's okay.
2. This would allow mods who don't care about designing a game and who have no desire to run future theme games to run a game quicker.
3. It would make sure that mods who "move on" to theme and large games have "real" experience designing and running a full game.
4. It could mean that open game mods can run whatever game they want without having people bitch about their game not being a "real" game.
5. The downside is that it'll put more mods into the Normal Queue, already something that moves pretty slowly.

The downside isn't such a downside to my mind. Using the open queue to get fast mod credits feels a lot like gaming the system.

[zoraster]

Open quee is that much faster, I thought they were fairly close to the same speed, but I could be wrong? Also 5) is a fucking MAJOR downside, and cripples the normal queue.

I'm not sure it cripples it. It certainly slows it down though.

And no, the open queue now moves considerably faster. A couple of months faster last I checked if I remember correctly.

[zoraster]

Checking now. Just a snap shot, but... chkflip, whose open game started sign ups on May 1st in the open queue signed up to mod on February 20th, for 70 days. Midnight's Sorrow's sign ups on the normal queue started May 2nd and he signed up on December 14th for roughly 138 days. That's a 68 day advantage to those in the open queue, or about 2.25 months.

Even though we all seem to agree that modding a regular mini normal on the whole provides better experience for designing and modding a future large or theme game than an open one, we actually PROVIDE INCENTIVE to mods to avoid that better experience.

[zoraster]

Checking now. Just a snap shot, but... chkflip, whose open game started sign ups on May 1st in the open queue signed up to mod on February 20th, for 70 days. Midnight's Sorrow's sign ups on the normal queue started May 2nd and he signed up on December 14th for roughly 138 days. That's a 68 day advantage to those in the open queue, or about 2.25 months.

Even though we all seem to agree that modding a regular mini normal on the whole provides better experience for designing and modding a future large or theme game than an open one, we actually PROVIDE INCENTIVE to mods to avoid that better experience.

Has anyone done an objective analysis of who went through which queue and how they ended up? I really don't think there is that much one learns from making/running a game that can't be learned along the way (if it is done right). I really see the requirements as more of a commitment test. So I really see no problem with a mod wanting to get through the whole process faster

what do you mean? what would we be judging exactly?

[zoraster]

Checking now. Just a snap shot, but... chkflip, whose open game started sign ups on May 1st in the open queue signed up to mod on February 20th, for 70 days. Midnight's Sorrow's sign ups on the normal queue started May 2nd and he signed up on December 14th for roughly 138 days. That's a 68 day advantage to those in the open queue, or about 2.25 months.

Even though we all seem to agree that modding a regular mini normal on the whole provides better experience for designing and modding a future large or theme game than an open one, we actually PROVIDE INCENTIVE to mods to avoid that better experience.

Has anyone done an objective analysis of who went through which queue and how they ended up? I really don't think there is that much one learns from making/running a game that can't be learned along the way (if it is done right). I really see the requirements as more of a commitment test. So I really see no problem with a mod wanting to get through the whole process faster

what do you mean? what would we be judging exactly?

whether or not they flaked from their games/had rocks fall everyone die moments
Basically rate of abject failure due to either irresponsibility, mismanaging their game or running a broken game

Okay, but that's not really why I want mods to have experience running a game. A mod flaking on a mini-normal game is just as hurtful as one flaking on a mini-theme game. I don't think flake rate is very informative in whether or not modding that first game helps.

[zoraster]

Sending out role pms is like packing for vacation. No matter how many times you check, you're sure you missed something.