Tulpa Forums
Clarification Questions on GAT Expectations - Printable Version

+- Tulpa Forums (https://community.tulpa.info)
+-- Forum: Tulpa.Info Forums (https://community.tulpa.info/forum-tulpa-info-forums)
+--- Forum: GAT Discussion (https://community.tulpa.info/forum-gat-discussion)
+--- Thread: Clarification Questions on GAT Expectations (/thread-clarification-questions-on-gat-expectations)

Clarification Questions on GAT Expectations - Ranger - 02-19-2019

I am a GAT applicant who is interested in studying up on the new GAT process and what is expected of future GAT members. When reading the About the Guide Approval Team thread, I became confused on how the new GAT structure effects the expectations of how GAT members approve or disapprove submissions.

About The Guide Approval Team Wrote:The submission process will go as follows: there will be a list of guides that are pending review by the GAT, based on recency and how active the OP has been. When a guide officially goes “up for review,” it will be stickied and there will be an announcement on the forums in a thread and in the Discord in a GAT-specific channel. Then, everyone will be encouraged to focus their energy on that single submission, so that there is more efficiency in the process. There is no limit on a submission’s official review time: it will end either when the submission gets approved, or the GAT decides that it needs more work. Then the GAT will move to the next submission on the list.

How exactly does the approval process work? Is it like before where a GAT member is expected to either approve or disapprove a submission and if so how what procedures do GAT members need to follow?

I also found this paste bin regarding the GAT process from 2013, and it contains expectations on how a GAT member's approval/disapproval vote works and what must happen before and after the vote. I understand that the structure is outdated, but does that also apply to their expectations of individual GAT members?

I also have a couple more specific questions about what a GAT member is expected to look for:

Are there any expectations or preferences about what language is used in a guide? The community has a lot of inconsistencies with certain vocabulary, and I am wondering if the Tulpa.info staff had their own idea of what language they prefer and what language should appear in the guides. For example, is "Tulpas" preferred over "Tulpae"? Is the word "fronting" allowed to refer to both possession and switching, only switching, or even allowed to be used at all? Should the language of the guide match the terminology and definitions provided in the Tulpa.info Glossary? Or are there no specific expectations whatsoever aside from correct grammar and spelling?

I also have a question about the approval and disapproval process. Let's say a guide submission has some grammar flaws and I tell the OP that I'm looking for certain grammar fixes and some re-wording on certain sections and then I will approve their guide. Would I have to say I disapprove or may I hold off on voting until the OP fixes their mistakes? 

RE: Clarification Questions on GAT Expectations - Apollo Fire - 02-19-2019

When a guide goes up for review, the GAT will give their opinions and criticisms of the content and its accuracy and quality, as well as potential usefulness to a new member. The OP will be expected to revise and correct mistakes as they are pointed out. GAT member who are satisfied may "approve," while those who are unsatisfied may either disapprove (which is effectively telling the OP that it either needs to be rewritten or just isn't acceptable at all), or they can hold off on voting entirely until the mistakes are fixed. Grammatical accuracy is a bare minimum for approval, so any guide with glaring flaws in spelling and such would not be approved. A GAT member does not have to immediately approve or disapprove unless that's what they deem necessary. Once a guide has a majority approval and the OP has fixed mistakes, it will be made official.

As for terminology, I do think the GAT should form some sort of standard. Tulpas should be used instead of tulpae, imo. We might want to come up with general definitions of terms to use as a standard, the glossary might work but it probably has issues. If a term goes completely off-base from our agreed-upon general definition, they should be asked to review it. If it's within the definition but a little odd, I think as long as they define what they mean in the guide itself, it would be fine. Fronting is a standard term in the community so idk why it would ever be considered wrong. Something like "shard sharing" isn't standard so it would be more of a gray area. Probably something to handle on a case-by-case basis after we create some sort of standardized terms.

If there are some things I've missed in the About page, the GAT may, of course, discuss and point them out to me, and I can edit it with improvements. My edit was meant to be a general overview of how the new GAT will work, not a concrete thing that can't be improved upon.

RE: Clarification Questions on GAT Expectations - Flandre - 02-19-2019

I want to say something like "We should have a poll for making saying tulpas instead of tulpae a rule just to give people who prefer it a chance", but the more I think about that word the more I hate it. It's indefensible except for "I like it more". Tulpa is not Latin in any way shape or form, and the standard for pluralizing non-English words is to add an S.

But anyways... you should officially ask the community before deciding that as a rule yourself. It would better to do that than to argue about it every time a new guide uses it, at least.

RE: Clarification Questions on GAT Expectations - Apollo Fire - 02-19-2019

I haven't decided it for myself, I was only stating what my opinion on the matter is. As mentioned, I do think grammar should be a bare minimum for GAT approval, and if "tulpae" is considered grammatically incorrect by the GAT, that needs to be addressed.

RE: Clarification Questions on GAT Expectations - Flandre - 02-19-2019

Yeah, reading that it would be taken the wrong way huh. I literally meant before deciding on it yourself, have a poll - not to imply you already have decided it yourself, which is what it sounded like, sorry.

RE: Clarification Questions on GAT Expectations - Ranger - 03-01-2019

Okay, I have a lot of questions:
  • Is everyone on the GAT team okay with the following voting system for approving guides? And how exactly is the rest of the community going to influence the vote because that idea was floated around but never discussed.
A guide must get 5/7 GAT member votes in order to be approved. In the cases where a GAT member wrote the guide or someone chooses to opt out of voting (whether that be bias concerns or lack of experience in a specific area), the rule is 4/6. If multiple GAT members wrote the guide, some GAT members opt out, or a mix of both, then at least 4 GAT members must approve the submission.
  • If a guide doesn't get the votes, do they get moved to the bottom of the list? How does #guide-discussion impact this process? If they get moved to the bottom of the list, will we spend another 2 weeks on their guide?
  • What happens if a GAT member needs more time to finish reviewing a guide?
  • There's a lot of anxiety about cross-community transparency. Okay, so what can we do to make sure guides from Reddit, Tulpa Central, etc. get fairly reviewed?
  • I heard Apollo's opinion on "Tulpas" vs. "Tulpae", but what is everyone else's opinion? More importantly, what vocabulary are we using or not using when concerning guides? What profanity is acceptable under what circumstances if ever?
  • Are Articles and possibly Tips and Tricks going to be scrutinized with a different standard than normal guides?
  • Isn't everything in the #GAT channel supposed to be logged and view-able to the public?
  • Who's going to keep track of changes within the Gat's management and organization? I know the "about GAT" page will be updated, but what about keeping a record in general?
  • How are we going to elect the GAT manager? How long will Felight be the temporary manager for? Can the community also contribute?
  • Who updates the unified guide review list? What qualifies for getting on the list? What happens if we find an even older guide we need to look at while in the middle of reviewing a guide?

RE: Clarification Questions on GAT Expectations - Luminesce - 03-02-2019

We've said it a hundred times, "Tulpae" makes no sense in any way shape or form. Tulpas (or sprul-pa..s?) are Tibetan, not Latin, so there's no reason to add the -ae at all. Standard form for pluralizing foreign words is to add an S unless there's specific rules used with that particular language, like Latin words (which have a lot more than -ae actually). People just said tulpae because it "sounded cool" or something - but a lot of people think it sounds unprofessional or hard to take seriously, and I've even heard a few 2012'ers say it was a joke at the time. Obviously not everyone back then treated it as a joke of course, but apparently some did.

RE: Clarification Questions on GAT Expectations - Breloomancer - 03-02-2019

As far as language goes, a submission should have some degree of formality and professionalism, however I don't think that we should put a ban on any words. The meaning of a word is highly variable based on time and context, so any word bans would end up in situations where they didn't serve their intended purpose. The plural "tulpae" specifically is so widespread that I would consider it to be an alternate pluralization.
Also, Ranger, just because some people are reviewing guides one way doesn't mean that you have to too. If you think that some aspect of a guide is terrible, bit everyone else thinks its fine, you should voice your critique and say why and try to convince people of your point. Of course that's not to say that you shouldn't listen to the points other people make either, just that you should have a little more confidence.

I think that it's been pretty well established that everyone is fine with 5/7 being the tipping point for a full team and 4/x being the tipping point for when people can't review something for whatever reason.

If you need more time, just say you need more time and we will decide as a group whether it's better to wait or to just have an incomplete team review that guide.

Unless they post the guide here, it is not our responsibility to review it. Reddit and other places can handle it themselves and probably don't want us getting our noses I'm their business anyway.

Obviously tips/tricks and articles are trying to accomplish different things from guides, therefore they should be held to different standards. This does not mean that they should be more or less scrutinized than guides.

I don't know what's happening with #gat, but I think it makes sense for there to be a private area for the gat to organize itself, and I doubt that most people would be interested in reading us argue.

I think that the single transferable vote system is pretty good, but I'm not certain if that's what we will be using to elect the managers in the end. The general consensus seems to be that once we have reviewed a couple guides then we will decide who will be manager. I for one think that we should just go ahead and vote since it seems that most of the stuff that the manager will be doing doesn't involve much subjectivity.

Any guide who's auther is active enough that make changes is on the list. If someone who isn't on the list wants to be on the list they can ask, and they will be put on the list. If we are already reviewing a guide we will stay reviewing that guide, then once we're done with that we will move onto the older guide.

RE: Clarification Questions on GAT Expectations - Ranger - 03-02-2019

Ultimately, I was overwhelmed. Thanks for answering some of my questions Bre.