Jump to content

community feedback survey


Recommended Posts

(edited)

the new GAT has been up and running for close to 2 years now. recently there has been discussion within the GAT about where we should go from here and if the GAT should continue to function as it has been and if the GAT should continue to remain in operation at all. we would very much appreciate if you could take this survey to tell us what you think about the GAT and how it has effected you. your feedback is important and it will have an effect on how we decide to do things from here on out

 

here is a link to the survey:

https://forms.gle/W5aACM5MyKuGrXnA8

Edited by Breloomancer

I have a tulpa named Miela who I love very much.

 

 
"People put quotes in their signatures, right?"

-Me

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Abstract

 

A survey was created by the Guide Approval Team (GAT) to see if the GAT was promoting or hindering guide creation, how the tulpa community felt about the GAT, and feedback on the GAT process. In a volunteer survey, 16 respondents filled out 4 multiple choice and 2 short answer questions. The results showed a significant percentage of people were hesitant to post a guide, mixed and mostly a lack of feelings towards the GAT's work in the last year, mixed feelings on keeping the current system, and mostly constructive criticism of the GAT and several ideas for how to improve. After alanyzing the results and reflecting on internal problems, it was decided to adopt an upvote system and remove the GAT entirely.

 

Survey Data

 

The survey was a Google form which had 6 questions and 16 respondents. Three of the questions were multiple choice and two were short answer responses. It was posted in #gat-announcements, on the Tulpa.info forums, and on Reddit. All respondents were anonymous and volunteered to participate.

 

We asked the following questions in our survey:

 

  • 1) Have you been discouraged from 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 a guide to tulpa.info because you were worried about negative reviews from the GAT?
  • 2) Have you been discouraged from 𝗺𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 a guide because you were worried about negative reviews from the GAT?
  • 3) Are you happy with the work that the GAT has done in the past year?
  • 4) Do you think that the GAT should continue to be the system that tulpa.info uses to control for quality on guides?
  • 5) If you are unhappy with the GAT, do you have any ideas on how you would rather things be done?
  • 6) Is there anything else that you would like to add?

 

For the first question, more respondents reported being discouraged posting to Tulpa.info than not posting to Tulpa.info or posting elsewhere due to the possibility of negative reviews. Of the 16 respondents, 7 (43.8%) reported they have been discouraged from posting, 6 (37.5%) said they would not post a guide to Tulpa.info regardless of guide quality control, and 2 (18.8%) reported they were not discouraged from posting.


image.thumb.png.db2e35d0fb2af601a256adffaf62a476.png

 

For the second question, the majority of respondents reported they were not discouraged from making a guide due to the possibility of negative reviews while a small percentage were. Of the 16 respondents, 9 (56.3%) said they were not discouraged from making a guide, 5 (31.3%) said they would not post a guide to Tulpa.info regardless of guide quality control, and 2 (12.5%) said they were discouraged from making a guide due to the possibility of negative reviews.


image.thumb.png.e5bc3a5bd239a60003acecb4bf3e06a9.png

 

Of the 6 respondents who reported they would not post a guide regardless of quality control in the first question, only one respondent said “no” to the second question. The other five respondents reported they would not write a guide regardless of Tulpa.info’s quality control.

 

For the third question, half of the respondents felt indifferent about the work the GAT has done in the past year while the other half are split. 8 respondents (50%) reported feeling indifferent, 4 respondents (25%) reported they were not happy with the work the GAT has done and the other 4 (25%) reported being happy with the work the GAT has done in the past year.

 

image.thumb.png.1404f33e3fad7c0428c5b88face723a0.png

 

For the fourth question, responses were mostly split on if the GAT should remain the current system of Tulpa.info, but neither achieved a clear majority. Of the total respondents, 7 (43.8%) reported the GAT should be discontinued while another 7 (43.8%) reported it should. 1 respondent (6.3%) reported they were ambivalent. Another respondent (6.3%) created a custom response to explain the GAT has, “issues to work out” to make submitting to Tulpa.info less worrisome but stated they didn’t want “under-developed guides” with bad information on Tulpa.info.

 

image.thumb.png.9dcd065f6eb658f115d2c9ca4f99dcb3.png

 

For the fifth question, the survey received some feedback from some of the respondents on how to improve the GAT. To preserve anonymity, I paraphrased the ideas provided by the respondents.

 

  • The GAT should be replaced with a popular vote system
  • Users should be responsible for linking to the good guides
  • The GAT should focus on grammar instead of judging guide philosophy, with the exception of obviously harmful advice
  • Guides should be judged by the usefulness of their content
  • Don't nitpick over small details
  • Do not discard guides for having a 'you can already do it' philosophy
  • Establish a rubric or clearer guidelines on what the GAT members are looking for
  • Establish a system to reduce anxiety, shame, or criticism

 

For the sixth question, the survey received a mix of feedback and comments on the GAT. To preserve anonymity, I paraphrased the feedback and comments provided by the respondents.

 

Overall, the feedback suggested:

 

  • Establish a place to work on rough drafts or provide resources on grammar, sentence structure, etc.
  • Make sure GAT members don't assume their experiences apply to everyone
  • Illegible or incomplete guides can be filtered out
  • Do not harass or shame guide writers

 

Overall, the general comments reported:

 

  • Bad experiences with former GAT members
  • Concerns GAT approval dropped over time
  • The GAT is not productive
  • Tulpa.info has more internal problems aside from the GAT
  • A couple compliments for reviewing guides

 

Analysis and Discussion

 

The data we received came with weaknesses, strengths, and unexpected results.

 

Weaknesses of this data include the restricted sample of 16 respondents and the fact it was a volunteer survey rather than a random sample. This sample could be showing a bias for those invested in the GAT for both positive and negative reasons. Therefore, it’s possible the vast majority of the community would be indifferent to any changes made to the GAT due to a lack of investment.

 

The core strength of this data is it supports the GAT’s assumptions and current concerns about frustration and a lack of interest. The small sample size and the possibility the sample is biased for both extremes supports the assumption there is a significant lack of interest in the GAT. The community has not been engaged, possibly due to frustration with the GAT, bad experiences with the GAT, taking their guides elsewhere, and or feeling they don’t have any role to play in the current system. The data also represented frustration and a desire for change as well as gave a clear picture for how the GAT review process was undermining guide submissions.

 

A result that was unexpected was indecisiveness towards the current GAT system, but this could be due to a desire to have a guide curating system instead of support for the GAT review process. When providing constructive criticism, a lot of the feedback was in support of a system to curate guides, but a system that involved change to the current process in some way, shape, or form. While everyone had different solutions to this problem the overall tone was the current system needed reform.

 

After analyzing the results as responses came in and discussing other internal issues with the GAT, we decided it would be ideal to change the current system for curating guides. Given that a significant percentage of respondents reported feeling uncomfortable with submitting a guide, we decided that a complete reform of the current system was necessary to promote guide submissions.

 

While we looked into establishing a 5 star system, we learned it cannot be done through the forums and decided on an upvote system instead. Invision power board does not have a search feature compatible with the five star ranking system, nor is there a plug-in the staff can use to apply this filtration approach. As a result, a vote system was proposed in place of the five star system. It was agreed upon to move forward with an upvote only system rather than an upvote and downvote system to prevent abuse.

 

Due to an internal lack of interest and not enough members to keep it running, the GAT will no longer be curating guides. While there was some discussion on making the GAT optional, it was a more popular opinion to end the GAT and remove it from the guide curation process all together. The new system will ultimately replace the old system, and the execution of the new system will be determined by the Tulpa.info staff.

I'm Ranger, Gray's/Cat_ShadowGriffin's tulpa, and I love hippos! I also like cake and chatting about stuff.

My other headmates have their own account now.

Temporary Log | Switching LogcBox | Yay! | Bre Translator

Link to post
Share on other sites

If there are no downvotes, then what qualifies a guide to be approved?

 

Also, I won't hesitate to write out my criticisms of any guide I think shouldn't be approved that I can't downvote - I think upvote systems are just as abusable as downvote ones, as more popular members/people in the community will easily get more upvotes. And as always, the "content that is interacted with more is boosted by the algorithms" problem is relevant. A controversial post, ESPECIALLY one that gets regular bumps/replies, will get more upvotes in general - along with lack of a downvote system, controversial guides have a huge advantage over simple, agreeable ones.

Hi! I'm Lumi, host of Reisen, Tewi, Flandre and Lucilyn.

Everyone deserves to love and be loved. It's human nature.

My tulpas and I have a Q&A thread, which was the first (and largest) of its kind. Feel free to ask us stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The GAT is finally being abolished? I think it's for the best. I've abstained from this community for years because of my negative experiences with the GAT and Tulpa.info in general. Maybe things will actually improve here to make it worth interacting with this place. Baby steps, after all.

 

My suggestions still stands: have a section for guides and guide authors who *want* constructive criticism and feedback for their guides, not just about grammar or punctuation, but for people unsure on their structure, formatting, and how they convey instructions and ideas. Dealing with unwanted essay-long post after essay-long post about why your guide is bad is incredibly deterring and stressful, as I've experienced myself. Recently, I've looked through the resources on r/Tulpas for their guides/tips and I haven't seen any abuse of the upvote/downvote system. It's not like there's enough people here to warrant that kind of behavior here from what I've seen. 

 

The concern over popularity contests is something I can understand, leaving people's unproblematic guides behind in the dust while "popular" members get all the glory. But it does bring the question: what members are "popular"? Server owners? Tulpa.info staff? Regular contributors to the community? I don't think it's a bad thing if it's popular because it's by a well-known and reliable author. Even then, this community is decentralized; there aren't really many figureheads with a notable amount of popularity apart from... a few.

 

If you see a post that you think should get more popularity, interact with it. Compliment the guide, point out why the guide's useful, or just bump the thread. I honestly don't think that advantage is that "huge." And it's not like it's even been tested yet anyway, and we'll only know once we see it in effect. I'll be watching from the sidelines to see whether or not this change is for the better and then decide if this community is truly worth giving another shot. I want to see things improve here, I really do because I've seen how good Tulpa.info used to be.

 

Hi, I like reading guides.

I also write guides; check out my guide here:
Tulpamancy: Guide into the Strange and Wonderful

 

authorthingy(galaxysandhorizontal).png.63180e0a60be1f3e36943e24d1a92189.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Luigi.exe

 

I fully agree. Considering my reputation, and what the GAT did to well written guides in my view, I would never create a formal guide. Without a GAT of people who seem to just be nitpicking and gatekeeping, I think it would open up some people to submitting guides who wouldn't have otherwise. I wrote guides and they're burried in my PR and Lounge, so, completely worthless there anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
7 hours ago, Luminesce said:

A controversial post, ESPECIALLY one that gets regular bumps/replies, will get more upvotes in general - along with lack of a downvote system, controversial guides have a huge advantage over simple, agreeable ones.

 

The biggest issue with downvotes was the problem of discouraging guides and going after guides that are infamous just because the author isn't popular. For instance, Fede's guide could have been a target for being heavily downvoted simply because he has an infamous reputation, not because of the quality of his guide (which as I'll say again, is actually a good guide. It has a different philosophy from the norm, but I don't have a problem with that).

 

While an upvote system has its flaws, it seemed better than an upvote and downvote system.

 

6 hours ago, Luigi.exe said:

My suggestions still stands: have a section for guides and guide authors who *want* constructive criticism and feedback for their guides, not just about grammar or punctuation, but for people unsure on their structure, formatting, and how they convey instructions and ideas.

 

As of right now, there are not enough people interested in the GAT to move forward with any alternative solutions. The problem is it can't be done, there are not enough people who are interested in writing reviews.

 

I think it's entirely possible an alternate GAT can be established, but at the moment there is not enough people to make that happen.

Edited by Ranger

I'm Ranger, Gray's/Cat_ShadowGriffin's tulpa, and I love hippos! I also like cake and chatting about stuff.

My other headmates have their own account now.

Temporary Log | Switching LogcBox | Yay! | Bre Translator

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ranger said:

While an upvote system has its flaws, it seemed better than an upvote and downvote system.

 

I can't help but notice the question isn't really answered. How is a Guide rejected if only positive engagement is noted? A lack of positive engagement? Does a pseudo-GAT still exist that just won't comment on why they're rejecting a Guide whilst pointing to a lack of upvotes? If so what's the difference exactly, other than a lack of visible accountability?

 

I don't just think an upvote system is flawed. I think it's irrelevant. Upvotes measure engagement only, not quality. Well written guides that are just large are likely to receive less upvotes with such a system.

Zen - Host.

Mika - Tulpa. Homegrown.

Rhys - Tulpa. Initially a Literary Thoughtform.

If text is uncoloured, presume Zen is talking. We all go by he/him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
2 hours ago, ZenAndMika said:

How is a Guide rejected if only positive engagement is noted?

 

It won't be. At the moment, there isn't a plan for rejecting guides. In theory, the bad guides will be obscured from view from more popular guides in the search. At the moment, the only thing stopping a bad guide is wisdom of the crowd through the upvote system.

One of the biggest problems was the GAT review process scared away guide writers. As a result, people either refused or stopped submitting guides all together. It was realized the fear of rejection was preventing guide creation in the first place, so the GAT itself had to be rejected as the main system for curating guides.

 

2 hours ago, ZenAndMika said:

Well written guides that are just large are likely to receive less upvotes with such a system.

 

It's possible guides will continue to be sorted based on if they belong in the tips and tricks, the guides, or the articles section. However, this detail hasn't been fully discussed yet.

While this is a possible problem, I can't offer much as a potential solution because the team has already dissolved. While it was discussed to open GAT applications, there was disinterest in doing so and the conversation never went anywhere. Even if I do open up applications, I personally doubt I can get 4 new members, let alone 6 or more.

Edited by Ranger

I'm Ranger, Gray's/Cat_ShadowGriffin's tulpa, and I love hippos! I also like cake and chatting about stuff.

My other headmates have their own account now.

Temporary Log | Switching LogcBox | Yay! | Bre Translator

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the only system I'm comfortable with here would be an upvote (and downvote) system that only allowed voting if you posted. A post with a yay-or-nay (or neutral, for general criticism) attached.

 

Basically, the GAT system, but not limited to any specific group of people at all except those willing to actually comment on them (even if it's just "I like it!"). And open-ended, no one has to vote with their post, or give particularly constructive criticism/praise. Requiring a basic post for the vote will both encourage actual constructive criticism from people who weren't going to say something but decide they might as well along with their vote, and also prevent any mystery behind mass upvotes/downvotes - if an unpopular member were somehow to be downvoted by people who don't like them, we'd at least be able to associate posters with them.

 

 

Also, Bear, you and I are the only two members I was particularly worried about having our guides upvoted because of our popularity. Though my main concern was actually unknown people from other communities who send a bunch of people over to have their guide approved here, but I guess if we required a post to vote, then something simple like requiring voters to have at least 1 post on the forum to count would be fine.

Hi! I'm Lumi, host of Reisen, Tewi, Flandre and Lucilyn.

Everyone deserves to love and be loved. It's human nature.

My tulpas and I have a Q&A thread, which was the first (and largest) of its kind. Feel free to ask us stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Ranger pinned this topic

Join the conversation

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

Guest
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...