This is a condensed version of the Guide Approval Team rules of operation: http://pastebin.com/KbBT1ZMY
Members who have been removed by request will have a "+" besides their name in the Former GATs list, indicating that they're still able to return.
The GAT IRC channel was #tulpa.GAT on irc.rizon.net. If you want to talk in there, better PM whoever you want to talk to on the forum first.
The Guide Approval Team is a team of trusted members who are generally active and opinionated, and seem to care for the tulpa community, are known to understand the basic concept of tulpas and know different forcing methods, who are known to be somewhat fair in their judgment (albeit with their right to individual opinions), who follow a certain set of guidelines to proofread guides, and decide whether those guides qualify for approval to the Guides section.
The GAT's purpose is not to dictate the visibility of a guide based on whether or not a method works for its members, but rather to objectively point out whether a guide is written sloppily, contains bad grammar, doesn't make sense, doesn't address things with a positive mindset, or doesn't offer anything more than redundant content found in other approved guides. These, among other things, are very important to writing good guides - and better guides will make for better tulpamancers, who, in turn, will make for a better community.
GATs will not be superior or special members. They're just volunteers who put time and effort into making sure that the community will be clean, and that new members will get a proper introduction to tulpas - not a sloppy introduction, where they have no idea what the guides are trying to tell them and then wind up going on irc to ask how to make a tulpa, where they're often bombarded with several techniques and suggestions from all different kinds of tulpamancers and end up leaving more confused than when they came in. This is what the GAT is meant to prevent.
GATs are not supposed to do things in secrecy. Every action performed by a GAT is open for discussion, the reasoning behind this being that if you make a decision, you should be able to back it. Thus, things such as private discussions among GATs will be logged and pastebinned in a sticky so that community members have the right to question this. Everybody should stay civil, fair, and honest whenever giving their opinion. This system is meant to help the community improve, not make it worse.
An Approved guide would be a guide that has been deemed worthy of being on the list of approved Guides by at least 60% of the Guide Approval Team. ALL the members in the team will have to have read and approved/disapproved of a guide before it'll be allowed on the front page.
An Approved guide does NOT have to be tested by a GAT for them to be able to approve of it. If the concept the guide is trying to convey looks like it will work to a GAT, and the guide fits all other criteria needed, they have the right to approve of it.
There are three sections of the forum pertaining to guides:
- Submitted Guides: Where new guides are posted to be read, and pend approval.
- Guides: Where GAT-approved guides are moved.
- GAT Discussion: Where community petitions for removal of GAT members, complaints, and GAT-related discussion goes.
Guide submission should happen in the same way it usually does - through the forums. This is so that other members can point out mistakes as well, saving the GATs trouble from pointing out commonly seen and obvious mistakes in guides. We're going for quality and community involvement here, and it's important that as many members of the community try to help as possible - even if just a little.
If a GAT reads a guide and feels like it should be on the front page as well, they approve of it by posting so within the thread, and notify the GAT Manager, who then stickies the guide so that other GATs have the time to read it and make suggestions, before they decide on whether they want to approve of it or not. Once at least 60% of the GATs have made a post saying "Approved", the guide is then moved to the Guides subforum, and added to the "List of Approved Guides" sticky, where guides will be ordered by technique group (e.g. imposition, general, possession), and alphabetically), and also be subject to further criticism.
The GAT won't have final say on the Approved guides. These guides are made for the community, and thus should always be open to be judged by the community. Thus, besides the (both objective and subjective) GAT system, community members will also have a say in the frontpage guides. They can do this by testing a guide for a certain period of time (which period is needed for which guides will be discussed later), and then giving their input on how well said guide worked for them. After having tested it for the required time period, the members can then post a pastebin of their progress report in the guide's thread, along with their summarized thoughts on it and a final conclusion, and then give it a 1-10 rating.
If a community member is ignored by a GAT, they should notify the GAT Manager. If they are ignored by the GAT Manager, they should notify the forum mods/admins and make a post about it somewhere on the forums so it becomes public. Even though this is unlikely to happen (ignoring community members would go against the very purpose of being a GAT), the system should be fair for everybody.
I know some of you may be thinking this will be way too complicated to be put into effect, but things are often simpler in practice than they are in theory - or vice-versa. This will obviously not always go smoothly, there will be issues, but I am thoroughly convinced that a system like this will help our small community improve for the better. - Zero