Defining a 'Mod Leader"

[Publius]

The first thing I would be concerned with is how do we define what exactly entails a 'Mod Leader' in relation to this symposium? Obviously what we want to avoid is someone creating a mod out of the blue, with few or no real prospects, simply so they may join in the discussion. At the same time we must be wary of ostracizing lesser known mod leaders, or leaders from smaller projects.

In my eyes, a fairly straightforward way to procure a list of 'mod leaders' allowed to partake in this symposium would be that the modification must be hosted (under hosted modifications).

Some questions about this arise, however:

• Does a modification need to have a released version in order for that mod leader to be 'legitimized'? This would be most relavent to many of the M2 modifications.
• Does each mod team only get one representative, or more (most likely just two, in that case)?
• How do we handle leadership changes? (ie Person A no longer leads a mod, but is still venerated in mod leadership and can add to discussion)

[Professor420]

Does a modification need to have a released version in order for that mod leader to be 'legitimized'? This would be most relavent to many of the M2 modifications.

I don't think a released version is neccessary.

Does each mod team only get one representative, or more (most likely just two, in that case)?

The way I think it should work is, the Committee invites specific mod leaders/members to host conferences/seminars, etc., however they feel fit to actually fulfill such a task.
The people invited to partake in the Symposium, are any mod with hosted forums here or at the org. We can send a notice to the leader, and he can send/take along any members he feels fit. This part can only be done, really, once we have a solid list of 'speakers', topics, and dates.

How do we handle leadership changes? (ie Person A no longer leads a mod, but is still venerated in mod leadership and can add to discussion)

The Committee is to draw up a list of who it wants to invite... leadership changes are mostly irrelevant, I think.

[Publius]

The Committee is to draw up a list of who it wants to invite... leadership changes are mostly irrelevant, I think.

What I'm driving at with that, is that if there is an ex-mod leader, who maybe isn't in the mod leading business anymore, but still has a lot of experience and wisdom to bring to the table, do we make an exception? Personally I should hope we would.

[Professor420]

Absolutely (myself being an example).

[Erich von Manstein]

Some questions about this arise, however:

• Does a modification need to have a released version in order for that mod leader to be 'legitimized'? This would be most relavent to many of the M2 modifications.
• Does each mod team only get one representative, or more (most likely just two, in that case)?
• How do we handle leadership changes? (ie Person A no longer leads a mod, but is still venerated in mod leadership and can add to discussion)

1. I don't think a mod will need a released version to be legitimized. Of course, you raise a valid concern about preventing the symposium by being effectively spammed by half-baked mod ideas that never take off. Perhaps the production of a coherent outline should be necessary for legitimization.

2. & 3. If we gave each mod team a limit of two representatives, one primary and one secondary, perhaps this would resolve the issue of ex-leaders. The first representative is the mod leader, the second an assistant of their choosing. If one leader leaves, they can remain on as the assistant to the new member. Just an idea.

[Tacticalwithdrawal]

Just keep it simple, if the mod is listd in the new registry it can send two people who can contribute. Committee (ie us) can invite whoever else we want (we vote on suggestions or something). Basically I don't think we should get too hung up on the selection.

Then, if possible, we let anyone watch/listen to the event.

That way we limit the contributers to those we feel a worthwhile, while still letting the most possible people gain benefit from it (and gain the widest recognition/benefit for TWC).

[Shaun]

2. & 3. If we gave each mod team a limit of two representatives, one primary and one secondary, perhaps this would resolve the issue of ex-leaders. The first representative is the mod leader, the second an assistant of their choosing. If one leader leaves, they can remain on as the assistant to the new member. Just an idea.

That might promote favouritism amongst the modders, well they might feel like that anyway. If we are going to have representatives, then I think we either allow them all to do it, or only the mod leader.

[Professor420]

Keep in mind, the people we are inviting as speakers is a very definite and specific list. The people we are inviting as attendees should be much much larger and not very selective... it should be people who are modders and are on a team, for sure, but I see no reason to limit to a certain amount of numbers (and certainly not only two per team). Again, I suggest, let the leader of the team decide who should attend the symposium... I know that during my time as FATW leader, had the invitation to attend come up, I would have been hard pressed not to send a good five or six of us (myself, fatsheep, apoc, palantir, balbor, and tb0ne, at about this time two years ago).

[Tacticalwithdrawal]

Keep in mind, the people we are inviting as speakers is a very definite and specific list. The people we are inviting as attendees should be much much larger and not very selective... it should be people who are modders and are on a team, for sure, but I see no reason to limit to a certain amount of numbers (and certainly not only two per team). Again, I suggest, let the leader of the team decide who should attend the symposium... I know that during my time as FATW leader, had the invitation to attend come up, I would have been hard pressed not to send a good five or six of us (myself, fatsheep, apoc, palantir, balbor, and tb0ne, at about this time two years ago).

agreed, unless there is a compelling reason to limit attendees, we should allow pretty much anyone to attend but kep the speakers/contributors under tight control

[Erich von Manstein]

agreed, unless there is a compelling reason to limit attendees, we should allow pretty much anyone to attend but kep the speakers/contributors under tight control

Agreed - this is to be a symposium, not a teach-in.

[Publius]

By attend I assume you mean able to view (if keeping those who can speak there are to be controlled, for obvious reasons, I suppose attend would imply watching) in which case I'd ask - aren't these public? Or maybe I'm missing something.

[makanyane]

Sorry I know bringing up a forum structure for this again may not be most popular suggestion but.... as its what we normally deal with here its a bit hard to avoid.

If it is under forum structure I would have thought you'd have your invited mod leaders / speakers (who have also agreed to speak on one or more of the initial discussion topics) as thread starters for the topics. But possibly have it open for any interested parties to respond at the question and answer stage, subject to heavy spam prevention moderation! That would make it less damaging if we do manage to miss anyone that would be good contributor off the list (in order to avoid losing potentially good contributions and also to avoid causing unnecessary offence).

I know RL symposiums are limited in attendances but think that's partially to do with practicalities of hosting that we shouldn't have problem with online.

As to who should / can be invited as speakers, as has been said by others I don't think we should get too hung up on 'are they current leader', or even have they officially been 'mod leader' just looking at Profs. list I think there's possibility of good speakers amongst the larger teams who might not technically have been leader, but would have enough perspective on the requirements. I suppose starting point has to be contacting leaders of the hosted mods, but we should also ask them if they know of past leader / team member that would be good as an initial speaker as well. We could also put up a thread in modding community asking for applicants as speaker (probably requiring them to PM someone outline piece) in-case above method misses anybody.

Finally: speaking of forum structure, if we start getting into specifics, even just in terms of 'mod leader of mod X' we need to remember we are doing this in publicly viewable forum that they have no right of reply in. So we need to be very careful if expressing opinions on any particular persons suitability, and also if explaining contents of any replies given to any of us over PM!

[Publius]

If it is under forum structure I would have thought you'd have your invited mod leaders / speakers (who have also agreed to speak on one or more of the initial discussion topics) as thread starters for the topics. But possibly have it open for any interested parties to respond at the question and answer stage, subject to heavy spam prevention moderation! That would make it less damaging if we do manage to miss anyone that would be good contributor off the list (in order to avoid losing potentially good contributions and also to avoid causing unnecessary offence).

We could also potentially open an application thread of those who wish to participate and why - of course if we are looking to avoid unecesssary offences this may not be the best path, as we will undoubtedly have to reject some who apply.

Finally: speaking of forum structure, if we start getting into specifics, even just in terms of 'mod leader of mod X' we need to remember we are doing this in publicly viewable forum that they have no right of reply in. So we need to be very careful if expressing opinions on any particular persons suitability, and also if explaining contents of any replies given to any of us over PM!

Agreed.

[makanyane]

We could also potentially open an application thread of those who wish to participate and why - of course if we are looking to avoid unnecessary offences this may not be the best path, as we will undoubtedly have to reject some who apply.

Can we pin down what we are all referring to as participants? I'm thinking there is something quite different about initial speakers which are invited / selected on basis of speech outlines, and general attendees who I think would be able both to view and post Q & S after initial debate.

I was thinking that if application thread were used it would be for any potential speakers we missed, and that rejecting on grounds of speech outline; i.e. doesn't suit needs of this symposium; is duplicated; not well enough prepared etc. might be less offensive than implying that certain people as modders are not well enough qualified as individual to speak. Which could be inferred if we restrict speakers too arbitrarily to leaders of mods hosted here, etc.

I'm still not keen on 'attendees' (if all they can do is view, and post Q & S) being limited at all, as I think imposing selection procedure for that would be much more problematic, especially for M2 for which modding is only just developing.

[Publius]

Can we pin down what we are all referring to as participants?

I'm referring to those who may view and post in every forum in the symposium. The symposium will be publically viewable (I think...) so deciding who can and cannot see shouldnt be an issue.

As for who can post in the QS, I see no reason to limit who may do so.

[MCM]

Ok there are a lot of issues on the first post.
Answering them all at once may be tough, but some are related to other issues. We may need to address them individually, and try to get as many leaders' as possible to participate. It revolves back to who is qualified, and what makes a mod leader qualified- is it percentage of completion? or is it something else, not so clearly defined.

I am not providing an answer at this point, but it will need to be clarified a bit.


I dont think a released version is necessary, but a certain level of completion may be in order, or some other criteria.

I see the end result of this being very helpful to those getting their feet, and even those who have experience and maybe get bogged down/disenchanted.

cheers,

MCM

[Obi Wan Asterix]

I wanted to post in this:

The discussion has been good. But, it needs to be made clear that mod leaders are not the biggest inputing party into many mods. Often, they are nothing more than co-ordinators etc.

There is a practical side that has been mentioned but I want to re-emphasize. The mod leader will very normally be the person who has most of the mod files in their posession. This way of thinking is a good way to approach the issue as it will help mods stay affloat.

TWC should have a facility where modding teams can bring grievances against mod leaders.... and we should be broad in our interpreatation of ownership and the mod leader category should be flexible.

[makanyane]

The discussion has been good. But, it needs to be made clear that mod leaders are not the biggest inputing party into many mods. Often, they are nothing more than co-ordinators etc.

There is a practical side that has been mentioned but I want to re-emphasize. The mod leader will very normally be the person who has most of the mod files in their posession. This way of thinking is a good way to approach the issue as it will help mods stay affloat.

TWC should have a facility where modding teams can bring grievances against mod leaders.... and we should be broad in our interpreatation of ownership and the mod leader category should be flexible.

Interesting and true on many points, the discussion in this thread has really just been about how to define a mod leader with reference to who we would invite as speakers. Looking at invite list should show that as well as approaching nominal leaders we are also approaching people who take on management roles within teams. Some mods work as you describe but also the mod leader can be overall guiding force whilst others handle the physical co-ordination of work and files etc.

I think the issue of possible grievances you describe should be addressed somewhere, it is hopefully an area the mod registry could help handle. It would also be something that could be discussed under the symposium topics - I think there is a category that mentions 'team mutiny'. What happens to ownership of work in progress, and the name and concept for a mod, if team and leader split is difficult area but one worth consideration.