What improvements would you like to see for GE&T?

[Maltropia]

I'm also wary of anything which takes activity offsite; yeah, to a point it's great to have things like IRC, Discord and whatever to keep a community engaged, but at the end of the day we're trying to improve GE&T, not remove all the people committed to its improvement and transfer them to an offsite forum.

What would people think about re-re-resuscitating the NS Better Business Bureau? The basic concept was a group of GE&Ters competent to help all players improve their storefronting and their GE&Ting in general; not a general GE&T discussion thread, just a venue for people to ask for feedback and get some multilateral conversation going. It's not the same thing as what some people seem to be asking for - a place for an editorial board to screen content - but, even if we think a low effort, copy-paste culture is the inevitable result of Not Censoring People, I'm much more in favour of giving people the freedom to find their own way and choose to ask for help than I am for requiring people to meet an ambitious minimum standard.

The thing, then, about templates is that they remove creativity from what is at its heart a creative outlet. GE&T is a venue for expressing ourselves in another form of roleplay; if we tell people "this is how you express yourself" we're undermining that creative freedom. I know this might sound hypocritical coming from me, considering how often I tell people to look at other storefronts for inspiration, but handing someone a set of dots to connect and colour in is a whole lot further than giving someone some pictures and a blank page.

[Argentinstan]

I'm also wary of anything which takes activity offsite; yeah, to a point it's great to have things like IRC, Discord and whatever to keep a community engaged, but at the end of the day we're trying to improve GE&T, not remove all the people committed to its improvement and transfer them to an offsite forum.

What would people think about re-re-resuscitating the NS Better Business Bureau? The basic concept was a group of GE&Ters competent to help all players improve their storefronting and their GE&Ting in general; not a general GE&T discussion thread, just a venue for people to ask for feedback and get some multilateral conversation going. It's not the same thing as what some people seem to be asking for - a place for an editorial board to screen content - but, even if we think a low effort, copy-paste culture is the inevitable result of Not Censoring People, I'm much more in favour of giving people the freedom to find their own way and choose to ask for help than I am for requiring people to meet an ambitious minimum standard.

The thing, then, about templates is that they remove creativity from what is at its heart a creative outlet. GE&T is a venue for expressing ourselves in another form of roleplay; if we tell people "this is how you express yourself" we're undermining that creative freedom. I know this might sound hypocritical coming from me, considering how often I tell people to look at other storefronts for inspiration, but handing someone a set of dots to connect and colour in is a whole lot further than giving someone some pictures and a blank page.

Hmm what you are saying about a crowdsourcing feedback thread would actually be extremely helpful as new nations who just discover NationStates have a hard time learning the code and such and most of their storefronts are unformatted (my first ones were like that).

[Allanea]

As a second thought, I'm not sure that the quality of storefronts, and storefront roleplay, have much to do with the quality of designs in them. THere were pretty good storefronts about that featured no designs whatsoever.

[Cirdia]

I'm also wary of anything which takes activity offsite; yeah, to a point it's great to have things like IRC, Discord and whatever to keep a community engaged, but at the end of the day we're trying to improve GE&T, not remove all the people committed to its improvement and transfer them to an offsite forum.

What would people think about re-re-resuscitating the NS Better Business Bureau? The basic concept was a group of GE&Ters competent to help all players improve their storefronting and their GE&Ting in general; not a general GE&T discussion thread, just a venue for people to ask for feedback and get some multilateral conversation going. It's not the same thing as what some people seem to be asking for - a place for an editorial board to screen content - but, even if we think a low effort, copy-paste culture is the inevitable result of Not Censoring People, I'm much more in favour of giving people the freedom to find their own way and choose to ask for help than I am for requiring people to meet an ambitious minimum standard.

The thing, then, about templates is that they remove creativity from what is at its heart a creative outlet. GE&T is a venue for expressing ourselves in another form of roleplay; if we tell people "this is how you express yourself" we're undermining that creative freedom. I know this might sound hypocritical coming from me, considering how often I tell people to look at other storefronts for inspiration, but handing someone a set of dots to connect and colour in is a whole lot further than giving someone some pictures and a blank page.

I'll be willing to get onboard and contribute to the BBB. Sounds like a great way to help people without compromising my own work. The tendency for some people is to just copy-paste what they see and think looks good without even thinking. I hope this would curb that kind of attitude towards storefronts and minimize instances of total and partial plagiarism as well. We can also use it to educate users on storefront etiquette such as acknowledging storefronts that inspired your own, regardless of how little that is.

[Cirdia]

-snip-

Hmm what you are saying about a crowdsourcing feedback thread would actually be extremely helpful as new nations who just discover NationStates have a hard time learning the code and such and most of their storefronts are unformatted (my first ones were like that).

There's actually a comprehensive guide for that in the Help Desk thread by Tippercommon.

[Yohannes]

---

I would also support a re-re-resuscitation (aha...) of the NationStates Better Business Bureau, with a change of name (Draftroom, Peer Review, uhm, I don't know?) to show that it is not the same old organisation. As per my original post, with important points bolded:

I would support the idea of a new Draftroom (i.e., a peer review and polite but stern, serious, honest, and to-the-point criticism thread), as Crookfur said. [...]

But it cannot be cliquey, as Crookfur said also. It means no internet relay chat or channel (e.g., Discord and other such internet website), because otherwise uhm, I feel individuals will group up together (and from there, it will only be a few chapters down to cliquey, drama, internet teaming up stuff, and unpleasant environment for some non regulars), and then it will fail.

I would also love to see a new Draftroom [...] to include significant focus on non military things, as I feel it'll generate more hype and interests from potential new players. [...]

[ However ] I wouldn't personally like to see, uhm, something along the line of 'this is what your storefront should be like', because I feel that it would subtly stigmatise creativity and limit out of box thinking by players who want to create new storefronts

1. The new organisation must be entirely peer review and polite but stern, serious, honest, and to-the-point in criticism, which I feel the old NationStates Better Business Bureau couldn't do from time to time.

2. The no cliquey bit is especially important because it would prevent socially adept players from manipulating the new organisation to benefit themselves or their acquaintances and friends in NationStates (i.e. trying to intimidate some players so they will not post to-the-point and honest criticisms, by out of character or in character action or pressure).

3. Players posting in the new organisation must not be afraid from offending other players with their honest, to-the-point but polite and respectful criticisms of other people's contents, or even other people's posts (say, if person B posted bad criticism, or wrong criticism of player A's content, then player C should have the freedom to openly state, politely but stern and to-the-point, her or his disagreement with player B's criticism). People must not be afraid to post what they think about.

4. Players posting in the new organisation must not be afraid of posting anything, whether criticism or opinion. There must not be anything taken personally against any persons posting there (i.e., a person saying something wrong about point A is then regarded as someone who don't know much about point A). There is nothing embarrassing or wrong with being wrong. We all make mistakes or say wrong or silly things sometimes.

5. Anything said there must not be taken personally. Otherwise, people will either not bother to post criticism (because they are afraid of offending certain players), or they will instead post from their alternate/puppet accounts.

6. It must also be extremely formalised to follow on the suggestions of Allanea (and Britonesia), namely that cluttering will happen if there are multiple people posting about different subjects at the same time. It must follow a convention and rules of precedence (application for review, people posting review number one, number two, case closed etc.)

Uhm, yeah, aha

[Argentinstan]

Hmm what you are saying about a crowdsourcing feedback thread would actually be extremely helpful as new nations who just discover NationStates have a hard time learning the code and such and most of their storefronts are unformatted (my first ones were like that).

There's actually a comprehensive guide for that in the Help Desk thread by Tippercommon.

Lol I'll take a look. Would've been handy in my early days.

[The Macabees]

---

I would also support a re-re-resuscitation (aha...) of the NationStates Better Business Bureau, with a change of name (Draftroom, Peer Review, uhm, I don't know?) to show that it is not the same old organisation. As per my original post, with important points bolded:

I think the idea of a peer review thread is great.

What about a peer review "storefront" a la GE&T Accreditation Agency?

[Yohannes]

I think the idea of a peer review thread is great.

What about a peer review "storefront" a la GE&T Accreditation Agency?

Uhm, personally I would support that idea too (a more democratic, fair and impartial version of a GE&T Accreditation Agency). So long as it is a deliberative assembly or committee (not any one person having the final say on whether a storefront is 'three stars' or 'one star', but instead as many individuals as possible). But, a part of me is also a bit unsure about that, aha. I would wait and see what the other people (in this thread) think

Edit: Uhm, just to add, we have to becareful not to offend those players (who really know their stuff) who are mainly posting through alternate accounts these days. They are not regulars of the current Global Economics & Trade sub-forum, but... they know a lot more than probably a lot of us here do, aha...

Again, I would personally like to see a deliberative assembly of as many individuals as possible, and not a select group of Global Economics & Trade regulars (how can we objectively decide on who are these people?), so people who are of the habit of posting through alternate accounts (whether for fun, or because they want to hide their identity) can still post honest and to-the-point criticisms or opinions.

[Cirdia]

---

I would also support a re-re-resuscitation (aha...) of the NationStates Better Business Bureau, with a change of name (Draftroom, Peer Review, uhm, I don't know?) to show that it is not the same old organisation. As per my original post, with important points bolded:

I think the idea of a peer review thread is great.

What about a peer review "storefront" a la GE&T Accreditation Agency?

That's a good idea. Would you go for the "everyone can make inputs" option or a "a selected group of GE&T-ers making inputs" option?

Pros and Cons:

> Everyone = Everyone participates in the process / Players not so well-versed in storefronts can make inputs
> Selected Group = Players with good skills in storefront creation can guide other players / Possible favoritism and a general perception of elitism

[Maltropia]

Uhm, personally I would support that idea too (a more democratic, fair and impartial version of a GE&T Accreditation Agency). So long as it is a deliberative assembly or committee (not any one person having the final say on whether a storefront is 'three stars' or 'one star', but instead as many individuals as possible). But, a part of me is also a bit unsure about that, aha. I would wait and see what the other people (in this thread) think

In addition to a community feedback and review forum*, I'd actually also like to see more storefront-rating storefronts. I know that there might be a conception that they're elitist and/or the be-all and end-all of GE&T (e.g. "once your storefront's five stars you've won GE&T"), but they are also an incentive to strive for greatness, and having different people rating with different criteria for five stars would be cool and a nice alternative to echo chamberiness.

I'd also like to see different kinds of accreditation; like how we have Fair Trade brands and the like, storefronts could be rated environmentally-friendly or whatever. We already have government endorsements and the like, so I don't see why we couldn't take it a step further. I recently stuck a made-up award into an airport's letters because real companies do flaunt this stuff. My city's airport recently won a European award and it's showing it off everywhere. Such things obviously need to make a distinction between IC and OOC awards, of course; award the storefront, not the storefronter, etc. etc..

* 'forum' in the sense of venue for discussion. I am not advocating another forum for GE&T, on- or off-site.

[Argentinstan]

I think the idea of a peer review thread is great.

What about a peer review "storefront" a la GE&T Accreditation Agency?

That's a good idea. Would you go for the "everyone can make inputs" option or a "a selected group of GE&T-ers making inputs" option?

Pros and Cons:

> Everyone = Everyone participates in the process / Players not so well-versed in storefronts can make inputs
> Selected Group = Players with good skills in storefront creation can guide other players / Possible favoritism and a general perception of elitism

Maybe we can have a vetting process for experienced (3-4 months in making threads) GE&T participants.

[Cirdia]

That's a good idea. Would you go for the "everyone can make inputs" option or a "a selected group of GE&T-ers making inputs" option?

Pros and Cons:

> Everyone = Everyone participates in the process / Players not so well-versed in storefronts can make inputs
> Selected Group = Players with good skills in storefront creation can guide other players / Possible favoritism and a general perception of elitism

Maybe we can have a vetting process for experienced (3-4 months in making threads) GE&T participants.

A player's tenure wouldn't matter much if they don't carry the right skills. It's a matter of quality and consistency, not quantity. I've been making threads since 2013 under different nations (except during a hiatus from 2015 - 2017), but that doesn't guarantee me anything. I made too many storefronts and most of them I've had to let go because keeping them all up to date was a huge chore.

The best option would be for people to apply as an adviser with the mentors overseeing the whole thing.

[Jeltronia]

I like the idea of reviving the NationStates Better Business Bureau in the form as discussed above. It is better to make it freeflowing and conducive for multilateral exchanges and feedback. Especially for a new player, I think that will be needed structure, a reliable place to get help and constructive criticism from.

Also, Maltropia beat me in saying the part about wanting more accreditations (fair brand, environmentally-friendly etc). I have been planning to set up one, a storefront that rates a business' eco friendliness but at the moment my schedule would not permit it. The thing is, I personally see accreditation storefronts as a good way to encourage feedback and quality in GE&T. Of course, provided they are fair, objective and constructive in handing out criticisms and all. By focusing the evaluation on the other aspects (customer satisfaction; eco-friendliness; advertisement creativity etc) of your standard storefront, you help the player add depth to his work.

Another accreditation storefront I've been thinking of putting up because I have yet to see one, is an accreditation storefront that focuses on storefront's forms and processes,which serve as the GE&T equivalent of the ISO accreditation. This accreditation will concern itself less on the a storefront's design, structure and product, but on the format of the forms, the format of the reply letters, in-character regulations and business protocol if any. Customer feedback can also be considered. So more storefront accrediting agencies/bodies/organizations along this line will certainly be helpful in my opinion, both in an ic and ooc perspective.

I would also like to see a GE&T equivalent of a business magazine or newsletter like Forbes or Fortune 500. While I know of a handful, it would be nice to have them publish material a lot more. Magazines or newsletters can also be another avenue for businesses to develop (i.e. players will pour more effort in their storefronts to get featured etc; business roleplays take on a whole dimension because business operations, practices, culture and characters can be explored and featured in a way that is not traditionally showcased in your standard storefront in the forums).

[Syrche]

if you are anything like me, you find yourself constantly scrolling through an ever changing assortment of unrelated businesses, many of which appear military in nature. Airports and Financial Institutions are littered sporadically. Here and there you may find a Restaurant, Clothier, Cinema, Car Company, ETC.

What if we had a system of organization in place? A catalogue, so to speak, in which each different category would have a sub folder to help keep it organized....

for Example:

1. Military
2. Transportation
3. Electronics
4. Clothing
5. Food and Beverages
6. Entertainment
7. Financial, Realty and Organizations
8. General Sales
9. OTHER // MISC

(Honestly, even if there were just a way to segregate Airports and Military from everything else it would make me more apt to participate in GE&T simply for the ease of being able to find what i'm looking for in a timely manner. )

Just a suggestion though. I've actually had this idea for a while, but have never felt an appropriate time to put forward this proposal....

[Holy Marsh]

Guidelines would be swell. A better method of gathering storefronts for ease of perusal would be good. It would be good to see a list of Mentor approved/top shelf storefronts in a topic somewhere. A breakdown of different tech level and/or styles of storefronts, with notable examples, would be helpful. Promoting quality content would help set examples without being buried ina guideline post. (Guideline posts are helpful and would be a great boon, but quick and easy is quick and easy)

[Britonisea]

Snip

I totally agree. Because they are the main industries, more people make storefronts that are apart of those industries, which means even more stores come up that are apart of that industry. Like you, I would participate more if it was easier to find what I want...

I would also like to see a GE&T equivalent of a business magazine or newsletter like Forbes or Fortune 500. While I know of a handful, it would be nice to have them publish material a lot more. Magazines or newsletters can also be another avenue for businesses to develop (i.e. players will pour more effort in their storefronts to get featured etc; business roleplays take on a whole dimension because business operations, practices, culture and characters can be explored and featured in a way that is not traditionally showcased in your standard storefront in the forums).

Just yes.

---

And well, I've voiced my views on more accreditation storefronts.

The Better Business Bureau is good too.

But ultimately, I agree with an ISO accreditation NS verison or something along the lines of that.

[Ceni]

One complaint I've had from members of a region I'm in is that the tech levels are a little too fluid - i.e. the storefront says "MT" when the tech is actually 20 years into a future; a RPer goes into II with their newly-purchased "MT" tech and then they get thrown out because it's actually PMT according to the II people. So maybe the definition of MT should be a little less broad so people can actually RP with stuff they buy here - not just buy it because "oh it looks cool."

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

I think the idea of a peer review thread is great.

What about a peer review "storefront" a la GE&T Accreditation Agency?

I think this a really good idea. Personally I spend most of my time designing/creating things and I'd like a place to get feedback on them which could be either technical feedback from people with the know-how or just critique of my writing style and structure of the writeups, either works. I'm also more than willing to provide (mostly technical) feedback, I've sort of taken up a "technical mentor" role in my region where I help my fellow regional players on the designs for their military equipment and what not but I'd be happy to extend this to anyone who's looking for advice. I'm aware of NSDraftroom but it seems kind of dead so I never bothered putting my stuff there. I'd personally prefer it to be something on NS (as opposed to offsite) because I think it's more engaging. Also personally I create all of my stuff with the intent that I'm going to use it in RPs so people who don't necessarily "design" their own stuff but have lots of RP experience on II could also help me out.

[Cirdia]

Perhaps another issue that could be tackled would be nations making multiple alts just for the sake of driving artificial traffic to their storefronts. In reality, it's like fraud, manipulation of supply and demand, or a criminal organization with innocent looking "fronts" that are established solely for the benefit of one or a few players.

[Crookfur]

One complaint I've had from members of a region I'm in is that the tech levels are a little too fluid - i.e. the storefront says "MT" when the tech is actually 20 years into a future; a RPer goes into II with their newly-purchased "MT" tech and then they get thrown out because it's actually PMT according to the II people. So maybe the definition of MT should be a little less broad so people can actually RP with stuff they buy here - not just buy it because "oh it looks cool."

This is actually a multi factor issue, not all of which is anything to do with GE&T itself.

The definition of MT differs just as much if not more across II as it does GE&T and there is a two way street that drives broad definitions in both directions.

The simple fact of the mater is that the definition largely depends on what OOC agreements or consensus people have reached with each other both formally and informally over time and these defintiosn will differ from group to group. The question of how you define MT is also difficult, do you insist on RLs tuff that has to be already in service, do you allow something that has been prototyped or do you rely on technology readiness levels?

There is also the question of ignorance both antural and willful, some players simply don't want any user created stuff lest it be in anyway "better" than what they have and/or are knowledgable/comfortable with whislt others simply don't know what is actually possible or not.

Ultmately this is the key reason for threads such as the "realism" group to exist as they do give access to a relatively unbiased (or at least uninvested/interested) and knowledgable group who can settle arguements.

As such the only way to address this in GE&T is by means of a more open criticism system/solution. Such as system shouldn't force a hard definition but a more generally conservative approach. Further more it will never stop the "noob" archetype storefront with thier railzgunz tanks and invisible jet fighters but then again anyone buying froma such a thread really only has themselves to blame for failing on the first responsibility of a customer which is to understand what they are actually buying.

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

I think the easiest thing to do is when in doubt just call it PMT. Nobody will really have an issue if you use a mostly "hard MT" product in a PMT roleplay whereas vice-versa get you into trouble and can boil over into heated OOC arguments which (speaking from personal experience) you're better off avoiding.

[Australian rePublic]

This might not be workable, but:
Whenever you open GE&T, all you see is military threads, and if not all you see is Civilian Airport/Airline threads

I woild like to see both catagories seperated so that
a) It can give non-military, non-Civilian airport/airline threads a chance
b) Customers don't have to search through 15 pages to find them

[Lamoni]

This might not be workable, but:
Whenever you open GE&T, all you see is military threads, and if not all you see is Civilian Airport/Airline threads

I woild like to see both catagories seperated so that
a) It can give non-military, non-Civilian airport/airline threads a chance
b) Customers don't have to search through 15 pages to find them

Unfortunately, that would require coding changes, and I don't see that happening.

[Yohannes]

---

As a second thought, I'm not sure that the quality of storefronts, and storefront roleplay, have much to do with the quality of designs in them. THere were pretty good storefronts about that featured no designs whatsoever.

This is another very good point (I don't know why no one commented on it) that I hope Allanea can further explain for us. It is also somewhat central to the idea of a Draftroom/Peer Review thread

I think the easiest thing to do is when in doubt just call it PMT.

I personally agree with The Technocratic Syndicalists. Aha

As such the only way to address this in GE&T is by means of a more open criticism system/solution. Such as system shouldn't force a hard definition but a more generally conservative approach.

I agree with Crookfur too.

Perhaps another issue that could be tackled would be nations making multiple alts just for the sake of driving artificial traffic to their storefronts. In reality, it's like fraud, manipulation of supply and demand, or a criminal organization with innocent looking "fronts" that are established solely for the benefit of one or a few players.

I had a chat with Lamoni months ago about that one. Basically it's something that the Global Economics and Trade sub forum will have to police by itself. But, the sub forum cannot possibly police itself on something like that. It's like trying to catch air. It's impossible, aha. One good way (of many) to erase that problem is to simply follow my suggestion (points bolded) here:

Finally, aha, and I know some players will disagree with me on this one very strongly, I personally would like to see a sticky, or maybe a notice, or anything, somewhere up there where Global Economics & Trade forum goers can see it, that just because a storefront thread has many posts does not mean that the company (or business, corporation, other entity) of that storefront is bigger than other storefronts not having as many posts (i.e., a VMK storefront with 3,000 posts doesn't mean the company VMK is bigger than other companies with storefronts having 100 posts)

I feel it's important to stress that out because, uhm, it would let forum goers know that quality is better than quantity; that the quality of their writing or the content of one's storefront is better than focusing on making sure there will be more players posting in your thread. That just because no one is posting in your thread, doesn't mean that there's something wrong with your storefront, but because storefront is a part of creative writing storytelling content in NationStates, and that ultimately you do it to make yourself feel good; because you have explained, to forum goers who have seen your thread, about something, a part of your nation state. See, my nation state is rich; rich in culture, rich in history, uhm, and this storefront is a part of that history, a part of my nation state's economy, aha

When we let storytellers know that their purpose is to storytell (to showcase something interesting about their nation, that they want others to see), and not to create big threads (with many posts) in the sub forum, then the problem mentioned (alternate account playing) will more or less stop

Individuals will stop worrying about 'why is no one posting in my thread?' or 'is there something wrong with my thread?', and instead focus on creating content, uhm, for their own enjoyment and advancement