Little Communities Idea

[PikeStance]

This idea is a evolution from my previous idea which received marginal acceptance part of which was proposed by Squid recently.
I am not sure of the technical aspects of the proposal. So, I opened it here for discussion and to receive word from GED or Squids on its feasibility.

If we were to go in a radical direction it would be to create smaller communities within a the larger community. That is groups based on contribution. Citizens and non- citizens can participate and contribute in as many groups as they like. I would do this through permission groups rather than user groups (the same way as development forums are set up). Member ship would be open, but recognition of contribution would be by the members of each group.

This proposal is consistent with the current "Curial Inclusiveness" proposal. The additional contribution illustrated can be determine by the members of the permission group as a recognition of your contribution and/ or skill. In other words, there would be a process to including additional areas of contribution.

This is an open thought, so your feedback would be nice.

[Sir Adrian]

So what would these groups do?

[PikeStance]

Open
Accreditation | Quality Control | Exchange of ideas (tips) | Support | Community Building |
The possibilities would/ could be limitless. Ideally, the communities will take on character/ life of its own. The final product would be determine by the participants themselves.

[edit] I won't have all the answers. It is just an idea. I am hoping it can be develop into something cohesive. That is, if it is technically possible.

[Junaidi83 de Bodemloze]

but recognition of contribution would be by the members of each group.

Sorry to ask Sir Pike but what contribution you expect from its member ? debate ? modding ?

[PikeStance]

Sorry to ask Sir Pike but what contribution you expect from its member ? debate ? modding ?

I am not sure what you are asking....
It would depend on the group. If it s modding group, then it would be in modding. If it is in debate, it will be contribution in discussion and debate forums. If it is content, it can be anything from AARs, guides, articles in publications, etc... How each "group" recognize its members would be based on their own criteria. How much activity each group would generate would depend on the memberships commitment to be a community. As it is right now, there is a little or no activity within the Curia apart from 20 or so members at any given time. As it is right now, the Curia provides very little incentive as a building block community cooperation. Will the creation create more traffic and more activity among the various groups on TWC? I do not know for sure. As it is now, I doubt it will change much.

[Makrell]

I think usergroups and permission groups are the same. (but i might be wrong)

[General Retreat]

I do like the idea of recognising contribution from specific sectors (a la Squid's proposal), but I'm slightly confused by the proposed method here.

Take for example a Writing Community group. It'd be created to recognise contribution to writing on TWC - by extension meaning the Writer's Study - right? So all that's been done there is creating a second parallel niche community of no notable difference from the original, that either won't be used or will draw / leech contribution from the former.

Any contribution that's relevant to a field in TWC could take place in the original subforum, with the bonus of being more immediately visible. Unless I'm catastrophically missing the point or misinterpreting you, this just seems very redundant.

[Hitai de Bodemloze]

To follow on from GR's point, a lot of these communities outside of the Curia are quite small, so everyone knows everyone. I could easily give you a list of active contributors to the Writers' Study with my eyes closed. If you wanted to discuss citizens from that community, within a Curial sub-community, you're looking at fraction of people. What can they achieve for their larger community that they can't already do within that community? Perhaps things like modding are different, with a larger base group, but for everyone else, it does seem like one step forward two steps back; adding a layer of complexity to something that doesn't really need to be that complex anyway.

However, I do like the idea of us representing our own larger communities within the Curia, and fostering more communication between these often self-contained communities. Having a kind of ambassadorial function would be interesting, where we can bring ideas to the table and increase cooperation and friendship between communities who might not otherwise get to interact much. Perhaps this is kind of what you're getting at? As opposed to 'what can a Curial-sub-community do for its original community' (which is what it seems like you're saying), how about 'what can we, as representatives of our original communities, do to help each other and TWC via the Curia'?

[PikeStance]

Thank you gentleman for your feedback. I have to admit I was not aware of the Writing Study Forum as a place for the Content community to congregate and discussed important topics of their area. It is a forum like this that id lacking in other communities on the forum. There was two proposals who's design was to do just that for modding and historical researcher/ historians communities. To date, these two ideas have not been implemented. If these proposal would be as well as other areas, like debate and discussion (Civitates), then this proposal could be a redundant proposal.

The point of having people join as a "permission group" (similar to development forums) is develop an informal registry of members area of contribution. In addition to the benefits I'd outline earlier and your input in regards to the content community, the information could be used by the admin to better serve the members interest on the site.

Sp to specific address your question: The proposal would not significantly change what you already have, except by converting it to a permission group, As you said, if the Writing Study Forum is a huge benefit for the content community, then you can rest assure that other areas of contribution will find such an arraignment equally beneficial.

[General Retreat]

Well, the Writer's Study is a public forum that's there for anyone who enjoys writing - AARs, fiction, that sort of thing. You can find it just below the Scriptorium.

Content has it's own vast subforum for each specific publication and also general discusion that only content staff can access.

All the permission groups that need forums in order to function - content, moderation, tribunes, curial officers, Hex, etc - already have them. Things that presently exist without using a permission group really don't need one either.

In light of the above, all that it looks like would be achieved is making new subforums in parallel to existing public forums where any discussions could have happened in the first place. My basic argument was that if you divine a niche into another niche all you get is diminishing returns.

[PikeStance]

Well, the Writer's Study is a public forum that's there for anyone who enjoys writing - AARs, fiction, that sort of thing. You can find it just below the Scriptorium.
Content has it's own vast subforum for each specific publication and also general discusion that only content staff can access.

I was aware of its existence, just didn't come to mind when drafting the OP. I would had used it has an example for including it in other areas.

All the permission groups that need forums in order to function - content, moderation, tribunes, curial officers, Hex, etc - already have them. Things that presently exist without using a permission group really don't need one either.

This actually is inaccurate. Most mods have their own development forums. I also outline its usefulness as a statistical tool for admin.

In light of the above, all that it looks like would be achieved is making new subforums in parallel to existing public forums where any discussions could have happened in the first place. My basic argument was that if you divine a niche into another niche all you get is diminishing returns.

So your argument is if you have citizens/ members not participating in the Curia then if you create a subforum where they might choose to participate, then they won't participate in the Curia. Well, gaining nothing from nothing is still nothing. However, increase traffic on the site because of the created "niche" would be something for the site. Moreover, there will always be 20- 30 members active in the Curia. There is a subforum for content, but this has never stopped these same members from being active in the Curia.

[Mhaedros]

This actually is inaccurate. Most mods have their own development forums. I also outline its usefulness as a statistical tool for admin.

While true that larger mods usually have their own dev forums, there are also dedicated forums to mods. There are ones for Rome & older games, Medieval 2, Kingdoms etc etc and each is split into a few sections depending on the content, let's look at Med 2. You first have one section for released Medieval 2 mods and one for released Kingdoms mods. Then there are Mod Threads, for unreleased mods as well as smaller released ones that don't have entire subfora. And then there is the modding Workshop where you can write tutorials, read tutorials or just ask help from the other modders.

Now each one of these serve a very specific task, whether it is to talk about a specific mod (ala Third Age forum inside Kingdoms modifications), whether it's to advertise a new WIP mod (ala my sig) or whether it's to learn modding better. I simply don't see the reason in creating a new subforum in the Curia where modders can talk to each other about things they have more than enough space to talk about elsewhere.

So your argument is if you have citizens/ members not participating in the Curia then if you create a subforum where they might choose to participate, then they won't participate in the Curia. Well, gaining nothing from nothing is still nothing. However, increase traffic on the site because of the created "niche" would be something for the site. Moreover, there will always be 20- 30 members active in the Curia. There is a subforum for content, but this has never stopped these same members from being active in the Curia.

Well no, but a modder who wasn't already going to be active in the Curia won't be swayed by a subforum about modding, because he already has places to discuss modding.

I'm only mentioning modding because it's the section I'm probably most familiar with, I imagine each type of member has its own similar forums.

[PikeStance]

While true that larger mods usually have their own dev forums, there are also dedicated forums to mods. There are ones for Rome & older games, Medieval 2, Kingdoms etc etc and each is split into a few sections depending on the content, let's look at Med 2. You first have one section for released Medieval 2 mods and one for released Kingdoms mods. Then there are Mod Threads, for unreleased mods as well as smaller released ones that don't have entire subfora. And then there is the modding Workshop where you can write tutorials, read tutorials or just ask help from the other modders.

I was answering a specific statement about permission groups here

All the permission groups that need forums in order to function - content, moderation, tribunes, curial officers, Hex, etc - already have them. Things that presently exist without using a permission group really don't need one either.

I simply don't see the reason in creating a new subforum in the Curia where modders can talk to each other about things they have more than enough space to talk about elsewhere. Well no, but a modder who wasn't already going to be active in the Curia won't be swayed by a subforum about modding, because he already has places to discuss modding. I'm only mentioning modding because it's the section I'm probably most familiar with, I imagine each type of member has its own similar forums.

Actually, a subforum has already passed the Curia. To my knowledge the admin is in agreement with decision. If you can't recall, read the discussion here and the vote here.
I could not disagree with you more about modders not wanting a discussion forum. I am a modder and I for one would love if they would implement one. The one AL suggested would be good enough if the one I am suggested is not possible. I am not alone. You can read something similar here.

[General Retreat]

So your argument is if you have citizens/ members not participating in the Curia then if you create a subforum where they might choose to participate, then they won't participate in the Curia. Well, gaining nothing from nothing is still . However, increase traffic on the site because of the created "niche" would be something for the site. Moreover, there will always be 20- 30 members active in the Curia. There is a subforum for content, but this has never stopped these same members from being active in the Curia.

What I'm trying to get at (perhaps not very well because my last post was made at 2am) is that I'm really not a fan of creating Curial clones of existing forums. I don't particularly care if people participate in the Curia - that's a non issue to me. What I do care about is the Curia potentially leeching life from other areas of the site by mimicking their functions, solely to make itself look busy.

EDIT: Hitai's suggested direction is pretty ace.

[Hitai de Bodemloze]

The Writers' Study - like the Artists' Studio - is a strange creature, that exists half in and half out of content. It's not content in the same sense as publications, but it's also not entirely akin to the Script either. It falls under the content umbrella, but the only real indication of this is that, for whatever reason, it's administered by content staff. I wouldn't say the community is a 'content community' however.

That aside, my main point is, what can a Curial subcommunity - lets say of the Writers' Study for example - do within the Curia for the Writers' Study, that it couldn't already do within the Study itself? Coming from a smallish community, I know the other writers who have become citizens in the Curia and I already interact with them in the Study about Study issues. Likewise, if you wanted to just have a Curial subcommunity for just Content, then we already have a subforum for inter-content discussion. We already have platforms where both citizens and non-citizens can discuss issues related to their communities, so creating one just for citizens seems strange. It wouldn't make people (at least from my communities) interact more with the Curia, because they can achieve more by interacting about the same issues within the original community. Why talk to just two people about an issue, when I could talk to twenty?

As I said before, I feel this proposal should be about looking out as opposed to looking in. How can the Curia - as a melting pot of people from different communities - forge connections between said communities, rather than needlessly breaking them down?

[PikeStance]

We already have platforms where both citizens and non-citizens can discuss issues related to their communities, so creating one just for citizens seems strange.

The proposed idea community wide and not restricted to only citizens.

What I'm trying to get at (perhaps not very well because my last post was made at 2am) is that I'm really not a fan of creating Curial clones of existing forums. I don't particularly care if people participate in the Curia - that's a non issue to me. What I do care about is the Curia potentially leeching life from other areas of the site by mimicking their functions, solely to make itself look busy.

The Writers' Study - like the Artists' Studio - is a strange creature, that exists half in and half out of content. It's not content in the same sense as publications, but it's also not entirely akin to the Script either. It falls under the content umbrella, but the only real indication of this is that, for whatever reason, it's administered by content staff. I wouldn't say the community is a 'content community' however. That aside, my main point is, what can a Curial subcommunity - lets say of the Writers' Study for example - do within the Curia for the Writers' Study, that it couldn't already do within the Study itself? Coming from a smallish community, I know the other writers who have become citizens in the Curia and I already interact with them in the Study about Study issues. Likewise, if you wanted to just have a Curial subcommunity for just Content, then we already have a subforum for inter-content discussion. We already have platforms where both citizens and non-citizens can discuss issues related to their communities, so creating one just for citizens seems strange. It wouldn't make people (at least from my communities) interact more with the Curia, because they can achieve more by interacting about the same issues within the original community. Why talk to just two people about an issue, when I could talk to twenty?

As I said before, I feel this proposal should be about looking out as opposed to looking in. How can the Curia - as a melting pot of people from different communities - forge connections between said communities, rather than needlessly breaking them down?

The Curia is most definitely a melting pot. It is generally about 20- 30 people; a small fraction of the citizenry and even smaller fraction of the membership. There isn't anything that can be done to change that. Citizens are recognized for their contribution which almost universally means in areas outside the Curia (obviously). To expect anyone to be that involved in it will be impossible. The metaphor that you cannot fit a square peg in a round hole.

You write so positively of the Writer's Study, so I am a little surprise you want to deny something similar to other areas contribution. Shouldn't other areas have something similar? The real answer is how the forum can best serve the needs of the members of the forum.

[Hitai de Bodemloze]

The proposed idea community wide and not restricted to only citizens.

The Curia is most definitely a melting pot. It is generally about 20- 30 people; a small fraction of the citizenry and even smaller fraction of the membership. There isn't anything that can be done to change that. Citizens are recognized for their contribution which almost universally means in areas outside the Curia (obviously). To expect anyone to be that involved in it will be impossible. The metaphor that you cannot fit a square peg in a round hole.

You write so positively of the Writer's Study, so I am a little surprise you want to deny something similar to other areas contribution. Shouldn't other areas have something similar? The real answer is how the forum can best serve the needs of the members of the forum.

Perhaps I was misunderstanding you then. Are you proposing to introduce more structure to pre-existing communities? My understanding thus far has been that you wish to create sub-communities of citizens from these communities within the Curia.

For the record, I actually have very little idea of how other communities function and was only speaking from the experience of the ones I hail from. I never intended to deny other communities privileges that I enjoy - I did not even know they lacked these. Perhaps there have been some crossed wires somewhere my friend.

Edit: I just re-read over the thread a little more carefully and think I understand a little better (although you seem to be arguing now something quite different from your original proposal). I'm not sure a permission group is the best way forward; seems like it makes things a bit too complex for new members or contributors. However, increasing structure within communities and encouraging more feedback and communication to and from regulars and staff sounds like a good thing - especially if certain communities lack this. Still, this is different from one community to the next - and what works for one might not work for another. I'm not sure some kind of blanket reform would be a wise move, but you never know. I also don't like the idea of stepping on people's toes - in regards to the staff who operate and dictate policy within these communities. Better to work closely with them if you want to affect change, as opposed to simply sending them Curial directives.

[PikeStance]

Perhaps I was misunderstanding you then. Are you proposing to introduce more structure to pre-existing communities? My understanding thus far has been that you wish to create sub-communities of citizens from these communities within the Curia.

For the record, I actually have very little idea of how other communities function and was only speaking from the experience of the ones I hail from. I never intended to deny other communities privileges that I enjoy - I did not even know they lacked these. Perhaps there have been some crossed wires somewhere my friend.

It appears you did misunderstand. This is an all inclusive sub-forum. As it is right now, only content has anything resembling a place for the sharing of ideas and giving of specific awards.
There was a proposal which passed the Curia for the creation of a modding subforum and one for the Historical Research/ Historian. However, other areas probably deserve something similar. Tihis proposal, I should point out, would be a "lite" version of the one's proposed. Although, making them as part of a permission group is something more. There are benefits to having them as permission groups; statistics, tracking votes for awards would be easier.

[Hitai de Bodemloze]

It appears you did misunderstand. This is an all inclusive sub-forum. As it is right now, only content has anything resembling a place for the sharing of ideas and giving of specific awards.
There was a proposal which passed the Curia for the creation of a modding subforum and one for the Historical Research/ Historian. However, other areas probably deserve something similar. Tihis proposal, I should point out, would be a "lite" version of the one's proposed. Although, making them as part of a permission group is something more. There are benefits to having them as permission groups; statistics, tracking votes for awards would be easier.

Oh, I see. So, restructuring the current communities to have similar subforums/subforum structures from wherein they can operate similarly to how something like content does? And not putting everyone outside of modding and D&D in just one big subforum? (Which sounds like a horrible idea)

I'm not sure how I feel about the former. Again, I think it's worth consulting the individual communities.

[Shankbot de Bodemloze]

Pike, this is my understanding of what you are thinking:

Main Forum Index:
-Contribution area A forum and subs
-Contribution area B forum and subs
-Contribution area C forum and subs

User 1 would join permission group A and C if they wanted to contribute to forum area A and C. User 2 might join A and B etc.

Is that correct?