I'd like to get feedback on possible changes to one of the most important parts of MFGG: the system for submitting and processing games, graphics, reviews, and other resources. First of all, I should present a brief overview of how the current system works. I'm not sure if we've ever discussed this before.
The current system 1. User submits a game to the mainsite. 2. Two Quality Control staffers review the submission - they play the game and make sure that it is playable and properly categorized, and that it meets the submission guidelines. 3. If the two staffers both vote to accept the game, it appears on the mainsite. 4. If the two staffers both vote to decline the game, it will not appear on the mainsite, and the submitter will receive a brief explanation of why the game was declined. 5. If one staffer votes to accept the game and another votes to decline the game, a third staffer must vote to break the tie. 6. If the game has been accepted, and the user submits an updated version, the update goes back into the queue and again has to be approved by two staffers.
Processing graphics, reviews, how-tos, sounds, and miscellaneous submissions follows the same sequence, although how-tos, sounds, and miscellaneous submissions require only one vote - not two - to be accepted or declined.
How can this be improved? These are some of the ideas I have:
1. Requiring only one vote to accept updated submissions. 2. Creating a "Members+" group for former staff members and members who consistently submit high-quality resources. For these members, their submissions would require only one vote to be accepted. This expedited approval process would be a reward for people who have contributed a lot to MFGG, and we might give a badge to recognize them. 3. Creating a "Subject Matter Expert" group that would give certain QC powers to people who have demonstrated ability in a certain area - like making sprites or how-tos. These members might be able to process submissions in a certain department. 4. A more radical restructuring of the queue system might do away with QC staffers altogether - in that scenario, we'd just have a few staffers patrolling to make sure that no one submits anything broken or malicious (basically, the way the forums work today), and the community would vote on whether or not to feature a submission. I'm not sure about this part.
Remember that the primary goal of QC is to provide some degree of curation, so that mainsite submissions meet a certain minimum level of quality. However, we also want submissions to be processed quickly - if a submission sits in the queue for weeks, submitters might grow impatient, and new users might even leave the site because they think it's no longer to active. Also, by improving turnaround, submitters can receive feedback more quickly, and thus act on said feedback. Any changes to the mainsite queue system should be aligned with both goals - to maintain quality standards and provide quick decisions on submissions.
What are your thoughts?
I'd like to get feedback on possible changes to one of the most important parts of MFGG: the system for submitting and processing games, graphics, reviews, and other resources. First of all, I should present a brief overview of how the current system works. I'm not sure if we've ever discussed this before.
[b]The current system[/b]
1. User submits a game to the mainsite.
2. Two Quality Control staffers review the submission - they play the game and make sure that it is playable and properly categorized, and that it meets the submission guidelines.
3. If the two staffers both vote to accept the game, it appears on the mainsite.
4. If the two staffers both vote to decline the game, it will not appear on the mainsite, and the submitter will receive a brief explanation of why the game was declined.
5. If one staffer votes to accept the game and another votes to decline the game, a third staffer must vote to break the tie.
6. If the game has been accepted, and the user submits an updated version, the update goes back into the queue and again has to be approved by two staffers.
Processing graphics, reviews, how-tos, sounds, and miscellaneous submissions follows the same sequence, although how-tos, sounds, and miscellaneous submissions require only one vote - not two - to be accepted or declined.
[b]How can this be improved?[/b]
These are some of the ideas I have:
1. Requiring only one vote to accept updated submissions.
2. Creating a "Members+" group for former staff members and members who consistently submit high-quality resources. For these members, their submissions would require only one vote to be accepted. This expedited approval process would be a reward for people who have contributed a lot to MFGG, and we might give a badge to recognize them.
3. Creating a "Subject Matter Expert" group that would give certain QC powers to people who have demonstrated ability in a certain area - like making sprites or how-tos. These members might be able to process submissions in a certain department.
4. A more radical restructuring of the queue system might do away with QC staffers altogether - in that scenario, we'd just have a few staffers patrolling to make sure that no one submits anything broken or malicious (basically, the way the forums work today), and the community would vote on whether or not to feature a submission. I'm not sure about this part.
Remember that the primary goal of QC is to provide some degree of curation, so that mainsite submissions meet a certain minimum level of quality. However, we also want submissions to be processed quickly - if a submission sits in the queue for weeks, submitters might grow impatient, and new users might even leave the site because they think it's no longer to active. Also, by improving turnaround, submitters can receive feedback more quickly, and thus act on said feedback. Any changes to the mainsite queue system should be aligned with both goals - to maintain quality standards and provide quick decisions on submissions.
What are your thoughts?
_________________
Course clear! You got a card.
|
|