Feb 10, 17 / Pis 13, 01 16:59 UTC
Re: Proposal - Weekly Q&A session with Igor Ashurbeyli ¶
Yeah, okay. It's good enough for me!
Feb 10, 17 / Pis 13, 01 17:20 UTC
The Proposal has been sent.
Since the online document may eventually be changed, here is a PDF version of what has been sent:
Feb 10, 17 / Pis 13, 01 19:28 UTC
The staff has answered:
Thank you for sending in this proposal.
There are a few issues with it that we would like for you to address:
Contributors are listed by alias, please update to legal names.
The use of 'we' and personal views are not appropriate in submission of a project proposal. It should be as neutral and professional as possible.
There was no contact with the C.A. team to ensure that the additional workload would be possible to cover with current staff levels in regards to moderating the responses and compiling questions.
How much additional work would this entail?
How many additional moderators would have to monitor the thread based on current forum engagement levels?
Who would do administrative tasks behind the scenes of compiling questions, sending for answers, follow up and posting of answers. As well as the 'transparency' tasks that you listed in the proposal?
How long of a timeline would there be for the translations?
How many languages would the translations be put in? The top ten or twenty or free for all as the translators want to complete the translations?
We suggest you review the project proposal guidelines as well so ensure no information is overlooked:
Regards, The Admin Team
I'm only going to answer those I know:
7: There would be no deadline for the translations to be done.
8: There would be no limitation, it would be up to the decision of the translators.
Feb 10, 17 / Pis 13, 01 19:56 UTC
I agree with Vador in regards to 1 & 2. That just needs some re-work and research to protect identities on the forums. As to 3-5, that really depends on the current volunteer status, and how many more C.A. admins may be needed to help that level out.
Translations team should be able to handle the workload for Q&A within a reasonable timeframe. And they could determine the top languages that it should be translated into, based on current inquiry from those sites. And if someone requested a copy in a different language not posted, then addressed at that time.
We're getting more and more Asgardians that are wanting to help out, and I imagine if the request went out for help...we'd get it.
Feb 11, 17 / Pis 14, 01 03:31 UTC
Feb 11, 17 / Pis 14, 01 03:41 UTC
With regards to my alias specifically, It'd possibly make more sense to scrub it from the document. Referencing the forum link that evidences it's design and conception allows for checking the community input should that be mandated.
Feb 11, 17 / Pis 14, 01 12:50 UTC
I've compiled my previous post and my new feelings regarding those questions.
@Eyer Also, there is some mismatch between your numbers and mine, I think you missed the 3rd question. That's why I put the original Staff feedback question so it's easier to review their questions and our answers.
Feb 11, 17 / Pis 14, 01 17:51 UTC
Maybe I did miss number three - my bad.
Feb 13, 17 / Pis 16, 01 12:06 UTC
Well, you want the community to help. But I believe that's not possible with the current tools at our disposal. If we had a dedicated tool, then why not. But we'll be using the forum, and therefore people must be granted extra permissions to edit posts and such. With the current status of the forum, I believe the extra work from this proposal will fall into the hands of C.A.
Feb 13, 17 / Pis 16, 01 14:27 UTC
Naw, you don't need to edit existing posts, you can simply make another. Anyone can do that. It'd be tidier refactoring existant, ideally the original should be retained in it's original form, there should be no requirement to edit it - the entire premise is slightly shady - but the end result is about the same as if you copy and paste the relevant parts from all the posts in a thread of all the "me too" and other slightly different variations of a question into a single concise question, or have to spin through the entire subforum picking out all the relevent parts to that question and compile into a single post. Ofc, one is easier.
All mod or higher privs are required for really is removing content that didn't want to be there anyway, and removal of the lot for archiving as the window expires. Sure once there's colaborational tools on the go then collectively the effort of compiling the mess into a tangible submission will be significantly more cohesive, but it's possible to work iwth what we've got to a lesser or greater extent.