[IDEA] Assembly Mentors?

[Abacathea]

[Violet], Reploid, Assembled Admins and ModGods,

This is my first visit to the technical forum, so be gentle

It occurs to me, that one of the areas I've seen in game where new players and old alike seem to have some diffuclty integrating at first is the World Assembly aspect to the game. Between the existing rules, legislation in effect and general stylistic aspects of it, it might do well to have people (as is the case with RP) to assist newcomers into the fold.

When one considers how many proposals are removed from the queue on a weekly basis, and how many are resubmits etc... It stands to reason that this is an area that could use someone friendly to step in and say "Hey there, I see you've done X, I'm such and such and perhaps I can be of assistance to you?", a gentle guiding hand as it were for both SC and GA gameplayers.

I get that until now the WA to a degree has been self regulating in this respect, but perhaps having three or four dedicated people there, might make the transition a bit easier considering the complexities involved?

Just my thoughts,

Aba.

[The Dark Star Republic]

How about the mods replace the reference guide, as they said they would three years ago (though that itself dates from a request I made almost almost five years ago)? How about the mods actually discuss and explain their rulings, and the proposal rules in general, so that these "mentors" can actually provide such counsel? I don't see how "mentoring" can work in a system purposely designed and maintained to be opaque.

When one considers how many proposals are removed from the queue on a weekly basis, and how many are resubmits etc... It stands to reason that this is an area that could use someone friendly to step in and say "Hey there, I see you've done X, I'm such and such and perhaps I can be of assistance to you?", a gentle guiding hand as it were for both SC and GA gameplayers.

There is nothing stopping you from doing exactly that already. Why do the admins need to add a badge/title/whatever? I don't recall Ausserland ever needing such.

[Abacathea]

How about the mods replace the reference guide, as they said they would three years ago (though that itself dates from a request I made almost almost five years ago)? How about the mods actually discuss and explain their rulings, and the proposal rules in general, so that these "mentors" can actually provide such counsel? I don't see how "mentoring" can work in a system purposely designed and maintained to be opaque.

When one considers how many proposals are removed from the queue on a weekly basis, and how many are resubmits etc... It stands to reason that this is an area that could use someone friendly to step in and say "Hey there, I see you've done X, I'm such and such and perhaps I can be of assistance to you?", a gentle guiding hand as it were for both SC and GA gameplayers.

There is nothing stopping you from doing exactly that already. Why do the admins need to add a badge/title/whatever? I don't recall Ausserland ever needing such.

There certainly is nothing stopping anyone doing that at all, and I acknowledge that myself. What I'm saying is though if we had people who's could dedicate themselves in some fashion to that end, it might lead to an improvement as opposed to leaving it at the status quo where anyone "can", but doesn't essential "do".

[The Dark Star Republic]

How about the mods replace the reference guide, as they said they would three years ago (though that itself dates from a request I made almost almost five years ago)? How about the mods actually discuss and explain their rulings, and the proposal rules in general, so that these "mentors" can actually provide such counsel? I don't see how "mentoring" can work in a system purposely designed and maintained to be opaque.

There is nothing stopping you from doing exactly that already. Why do the admins need to add a badge/title/whatever? I don't recall Ausserland ever needing such.

There certainly is nothing stopping anyone doing that at all, and I acknowledge that myself. What I'm saying is though if we had people who's could dedicate themselves in some fashion to that end, it might lead to an improvement as opposed to leaving it at the status quo where anyone "can", but doesn't essential "do".

Then I am at a loss as to what the Technical component of this suggestion is. I don't believe there is a line of game code [violet] could tweak to force players to spend their time commenting on other people's proposals; and as I've suggested, even those with the time to devote may be disinclined to do so because experience suggests it simply isn't worth it, and my advice to new players would be to avoid it entirely and play another part of the game; this one is done.

But if you're looking for someone to assist, Eireann Fae is looking for feedback on the latest wording of his Sexual Education Act.

[Abacathea]

There certainly is nothing stopping anyone doing that at all, and I acknowledge that myself. What I'm saying is though if we had people who's could dedicate themselves in some fashion to that end, it might lead to an improvement as opposed to leaving it at the status quo where anyone "can", but doesn't essential "do".

Then I am at a loss as to what the Technical component of this suggestion is. I don't believe there is a line of game code [violet] could tweak to force players to spend their time commenting on other people's proposals; and as I've suggested, even those with the time to devote may be disinclined to do so because experience suggests it simply isn't worth it, and my advice to new players would be to avoid it entirely and play another part of the game; this one is done.

But if you're looking for someone to assist, Eireann Fae is looking for feedback on the latest wording of his Sexual Education Act.

You're debasing it to something less than what it is. But you have a tendancy to do that to the bulk of my ideas Gruen. The attitude of " avoid it entirely and play another part of the game " might be why you cannot see the purpose behind this. If you don't mind i'd rather hear the thoughts of the admin/other players before I decide this wasn't a good idea.

[Sanctaria]

I think this is too similar to the General forum Mentors discussion currently ongoing which, last I checked, the Mods aren't too supportive of either. You can't really tell people how they're debating is wrong and they should just go away - which will especially not work in the GA/SC where the egos are the size of dwarf-planets.

The Mods already tell people to listen to the advice of people who are there longer, which some do and some don't, and I honestly don't think having some players in a different colour will encourage those who don't listen to change their minds.

[Bears Armed]

When one considers how many proposals are removed from the queue on a weekly basis, and how many are resubmits etc...

Many (perhaps even "most"] of them submitted by players who don't actually use the GA forum, and who therefore wouldn't notice the suggested Mentors anyway...

Or are you suggesting that the Mentors should proactively TG the authors of such proposals?

[Mousebumples]

I don't participate in any of the pure RP forums on NationStates, but wouldn't/couldn't a WA Mentor work similar to that fashion? It wouldn't be about telling people how to debate, per se, but more about how to construct a workable document that is (hopefully) within the confines of the rules. I would think that II/P2TM mentors help players figure out how to construct their RP posts and what sort of framework to start with.

I haven't had the free time as of late to be as involved with the GA forum as I'd like, and there are so many proposals (or, well, so many more than I can stay active with) that it's difficult to know which ones are "worth helping" and which ones are already circling the drain. I don't know if this idea would be a success or not, but - alternatively - could Aba (or someone) compile a list of such Assembly mentors and have it, maybe, added to a sticky somewhere? At least, that way, if a given author feels that their proposal is worthwhile but going nowhere thanks to a lack of feedback, etc., from the crowd ... they could try to specifically ask someone who hasn't been involved in dogpiling their proposal for their thoughts or suggestions ... ?

[Sanctaria]

I don't participate in any of the pure RP forums on NationStates, but wouldn't/couldn't a WA Mentor work similar to that fashion? It wouldn't be about telling people how to debate, per se, but more about how to construct a workable document that is (hopefully) within the confines of the rules. I would think that II/P2TM mentors help players figure out how to construct their RP posts and what sort of framework to start with.

I wouldn't think this to be workable in the WA. As opposed to P2TM/II, which are definitely and definitively IC, many players don't RP or do IC in the GA, and especially not in the SC.

If we're talking about teaching players how to construct resolutions in the correct format, we do that already, but every author has their own style. Also we'd have the added complication of the NatSov/IntFed divide, which would probably reflect itself in any official Mentoring program, and then could end up confusing newbies anymore.

Those that come to the forum to work with their drafts generally listen to support without the need for a formal Mentor program. Those who come to the forums and don't listen, won't listen to official Mentors either. And then those who don't come to the forum at all definitely won't be affected.

The rulesets for resolutions are clear and well defined and you already have regulars helping people. Instituting a mentor program isn't needed in the WA because all it would do is divide things more and boost the egos of people who really don't need any more ego boosting.

[Elke and Elba]

Well, to be honest to some extent we do need this feature. As I was telling AD, stepping into GA/SC is just like stepping into a drum of hydrochloric acid/sodium hydroxide. The only difference is that they don't cancel out each other.

The halls itself are absolutely caustic in such a sense that being detached to whatever I'm writing, taking people's self-backslapping sometimes-unconstructive opinions requires a bucketful of salt and going in rarely to keep pH levels high (while doing something else more useful).

For a start, we could:
1. Implement Assembly Mentors system as Aba has said.

2. Implement [CLOSED] feature, of which only Mentors can comment (obviously, be gentle) on these drafts. We want to attract new talent, not chase away any potential good people or people who don't have thick enough skin to continue dredging in acidic mud (aka unconstructive nonsense). Delete any comment unsolicited, and try to keep it civil at best.

But then again, no matter how nice we all can be, we all have our PMS moments, which can be kinda often, sometimes. That usually happens to most people in the chambers. Not sure how this is going to work, honestly, albeit it being a good idea.

EnE.

[Abacathea]

When one considers how many proposals are removed from the queue on a weekly basis, and how many are resubmits etc...

Many (perhaps even "most"] of them submitted by players who don't actually use the GA forum, and who therefore wouldn't notice the suggested Mentors anyway...

Or are you suggesting that the Mentors should proactively TG the authors of such proposals?

This to a degree yes I couldn't see how it wouldn't work.

Bumples has pretty much summed up what I had in mind above. How to draft, how the systems work, hell even how to construct a reasonable IC character if they so wish.

That said if the admins don't go for this perhaps a list of people who could be TGed for assistance could work but I'd like to see if the site would officially support a framework first and then use that as an alternative if not.

[Sanctaria]

Implement [CLOSED] feature, of which only Mentors can comment (obviously, be gentle) on these drafts. We want to attract new talent, not chase away any potential good people or people who don't have thick enough skin to continue dredging in acidic mud (aka unconstructive nonsense). Delete any comment unsolicited, and try to keep it civil at best.

Eh no, definitely not. Resolutions have an effect on ~17,000 nations - any one of those 17,000 nations should be able to comment on a draft. Forbidding people from commenting on drafts because their names aren't in a fancy colour should not be what the WA is about, and such segregation will only lead to piss poor resolutions.

The idea hasn't even been seriously considered yet and already we have the "Mentors should have exclusivity and the final say on some drafts 'cos they're better" attitude coming out. That's sad.

[Elke and Elba]

Implement [CLOSED] feature, of which only Mentors can comment (obviously, be gentle) on these drafts. We want to attract new talent, not chase away any potential good people or people who don't have thick enough skin to continue dredging in acidic mud (aka unconstructive nonsense). Delete any comment unsolicited, and try to keep it civil at best.

Eh no, definitely not. Resolutions have an effect on ~17,000 nations - any one of those 17,000 nations should be able to comment on a draft. Forbidding people from commenting on drafts because their names aren't in a fancy colour should not be what the WA is about, and such segregation will only lead to piss poor resolutions.

The idea hasn't even been seriously considered yet and already we have the "Mentors should have exclusivity and the final say on some drafts 'cos they're better" attitude coming out. That's sad.

Eh, I'm with you on the last point if you haven't realised,

Not sure how this is going to work, honestly, albeit it being a good idea.

was just a very euphemistic point about the behaviour of people in the WA.

But then again, since when had we have great new talent coming into the GA? Aba was the last good thing to happen to the WA.

That brings back to my "I'm with you on the last point", given that the "cos they're better" attitude is coming out so obscenely, how do we actually get that ill chopped off and removing the unpleasantness this has been causing the chambers to decline and in inhibiting organic growth of the WA that caused it to become a jerkfest in the first place?

[Bears Armed]

Implement [CLOSED] feature, of which only Mentors can comment (obviously, be gentle) on these drafts. We want to attract new talent, not chase away any potential good people or people who don't have thick enough skin to continue dredging in acidic mud (aka unconstructive nonsense). Delete any comment unsolicited, and try to keep it civil at best.

Eh no, definitely not. Resolutions have an effect on ~17,000 nations - any one of those 17,000 nations should be able to comment on a draft. Forbidding people from commenting on drafts because their names aren't in a fancy colour should not be what the WA is about, and such segregation will only lead to piss poor resolutions.

Agreed. if any such feature were to be implemented then in my opinion there would have to be a required period of time, of reasonable length, between the subsequent lifting of '[ClOSED]' status and the earliest point at which the proposal could actually be submitted.

[Mousebumples]

One idea I've been toying with is introducing the WA 101 courses I developed for Europeia awhile ago on the NS side of things. However, it's meant to be interactive (with classwork and stuff) and I doubt that I have the time to respond/grade for everyone who stumbles upon it on the NS side of things. Cutting it down to a more reasonable/accessible guide has been on my to-do list for awhile.

However, Aba, if you know anyone who's interested in taking such a class, have them TG me, and we can hopefully work out ... something. They'd have to join the Euro forums as either a citizen or a diplomat, but for those that are seriously interested in trying to improve on this side of things ... it may be worth pursuing. (It's tied into Elias's SC classes, but since he wrote those - and I wrote the GA ones - they have a different setup, obviously.)