Jump to content

Update: Retiring Resources, other changes

Recommended Posts

[align=justify]After examining and discussing the Resources board, the current GAT voted (6/6) to remove it. This is because the overwhelming majority of threads on that board were clearly either Guides or Tips and Tricks, and seemed to have been arbitrarily put in Resources. Only a few threads seemed to belong there, most of which could be easily moved to other boards too. Instead of having a board with only 3 or 4 threads, we voted to redistribute all of the threads. There was some confusion over what "Resources" even meant, as well, as when the board was first implemented, the only description it was given was "it should be obvious what goes here: resources," which could count basically any submission on the forums.


All of the contents of the Resources board have been distributed into either Guides or Tips and Tricks. None of them have been removed/deleted. The Resources board has been removed, however. From now on, submissions will go to Guides, Tips and Tricks, or Articles when approved. If there is confusion over which one is most appropriate, the GAT will decide when reviewing.[/align]


Here's the purpose of each board:

Guides: To share information on how to go from step A to step Z in any particular topic/field (eg "How to Impose")

Tips and Tricks: Smaller bits of advice or information that don't make up a full guide (eg "This May Help You Impose Better")

Articles: Informative writings that share knowledge or research on a subject, rather than advice or a method (eg "My Experiences with Imposition")


In other news, there have been some changes to the guide approval team. I realized that we haven't really made any formal announcements about it yet. Ponytail, Kitsune in Yellow, and Clo have left the GAT. JGC's Gavin and Osaka have been added to the GAT, and there's still one open slot, so anyone who's interested in joining should apply


Ranger and my system are the GAT managers. That doesn't mean we have more power in our votes or anything, more so that we try to keep things rolling.


The GAT have put together a list of guidelines to follow when reviewing guides. They can be viewed here.


[align=justify]As for the reviews, the GAT is currently not ready to officially set deadlines yet, but the current GAT members are free to review anything on the list in the mean time. The list has been updated to display the current members of the GAT, along with which members have reviewed which guides. Note that it may be system members of the people listed who write reviews, which is fine, but only one vote is permitted per system. Members who are no longer on the team won't have their reviews counted for the submissions that are still up for review, however their previous reviews of other approved or unapproved submissions still count. All of the submissions still up for review are stickied in the Submissions board. They will be unstickied when reviews are over, and moved to the appropriate board if approved.


When the GAT does decide to officially resume reviewing, there will be an overall deadline set for the four submissions currently up, likely of about two months or so. However, this new deadline will not count any new submissions posted since the deadline is set: those submissions will get their own deadline of about two weeks since posting, depending on its length and if any other submissions are posted before or after it. The goal is to clear the review list so that any submission goes up for review automatically. GAT members should complete reviews by their deadlines, however we may extend them if things come up and members need more time.[/align]


We've settled on the following approval ratios for reviews:

If 7 GAT members are reviewing, a guide needs 5 approvals. This may seem like a lot, but we feel it's necessary for a large majority, and the trade-off is that the GAT will always be happy to help you improve your submission to reach approval. It won't be like the past GAT where people just said "disapprove" and nothing else. We're here to help, not intimidate.

If only 6 members are reviewing, a guide needs 4 approvals. However, if only 6 members are reviewing because the author of the guide is a GAT member, 5 approvals will be required. The GAT wants to avoid having only 6 members vote, however, so we may appoint "substitutes" to review in place of missing members. Whoever is absent from reviewing will pick a substitute and the GAT will vote on their choice. GAT members cannot pick their own substitute if it is their submission being reviewed, however. If less than 6 members are reviewing, substitutes will become a necessity, as we'd like for there to be a minimum of 6 reviewers per submission. However, this situation is unlikely to happen. The substitute idea is still in development, so nothing's been fleshed out or set in stone. It's not a priority until after we've reached 7 members on the team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...