L Admin
Beginning the new Staff critique for the month of November.
The one thing I've seen; and coming from recent personal experience is the lack in communication between the Roleplay Judges and a set across the board stance on technology that seemingly does not exist at this current time.
To use my current example. I had a piece of tech denied specifically due to its appearance while being told that it is because the site will deny "Mechs." However I have also seen that while this one or few particular staff members take this stance, it is not a full across the board stance. I have seen other technologies that have been approved that are without a doubt "Mechs," that were approved without a second thought.
At this moment that is my biggest concern and personal pet peeve; that the Roleplay Judges are not communicating more coherently or efficiently as they should when it comes to what should, can, and will be approved or denied in terms of specific aspects of a submission.
When a member sees that their submission is denied by one Roleplay Judge for a set reason, then turns around and sees another submission which is in the exact same area when it comes to design, aspect, feel, etc etc; is approved by a separate Roleplay Judge after having been told otherwise by the first; it creates conflicting messages. Not only does it create conflicting messages between Roleplay Judges, it also creates conflicting messages between the Roleplay Judges and the members.
If this trend of approval and denial based on a specific Roleplay Judges own bias and feelings continues, then I foresee people specifically asking for a specific RPJ just to get their submission approved; as well as attempt to keep their submissions away from those RPJs that would deny said submission. I feel that because of this, because of the possibility of this creating further conflict; the RPJs need to come to an agreement (be it by their own doing, or a staff meeting.) There needs to be a set outline of what will be and will not be approved on this site; across the board rather than it being a RPJ case by case basis.
In this way it will create a more fair process for all members; rather than making them feel as if they had been cheated on their submission, and left asking why there submission was denied and others were approved.
I'm working on a solution that will ensure we will never have to rely on anyone else or worry about losing data again.Daella Apparine said:I suggest manual backups from now on.
Never gonna let you forget.
I imagine when normal operations restart, I'll have more to say.