OpenGeofiction:Multimap stylesheet 2 and Forum:Standards and documentation/Reevaluating the Application Process in OpenGeoFiction: Difference between pages
(Difference between pages)
(Color differentiation on economy index page) |
Chazeltine (talk | contribs) (Thoughts) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<div class="forumheader" style="margin: 1; background-color: #eeeeee; text-align: left; padding: 5px;">'''[[Forum:Index|Forums]] → [[Forum:Standards and documentation|Standards and documentation]] → {{PAGENAME}}'''</div>[[Category:Standards and documentation]] | |||
<!-- Write below this line, please. --> | |||
== Discussion: Reevaluating the Territory Application Process in Opengeofiction == | |||
Hello fellow mappers, | |||
I wanted to open a discussion about the current territory application process in Opengeofiction. While the platform has thrived under the guidance of our dedicated admin team, there are aspects of the territory application process that I believe could be reconsidered for the benefit of the community. | |||
'''The Current State''': The existing vetting process, although effective in preserving quality, has set a high barrier to entry. While there's no formal requirement of 1000 hours of mapping experience, the intense scrutiny from the admin team often makes it feel as if one needs that level of expertise to even be considered for a territory. | |||
'''The Concern''': This rigorous process seems to discourage many talented mappers. There's a sentiment among some that it's easier to pass a driving test than to secure a piece of virtual land on Opengeofiction. This is particularly concerning given the number of vacant territories, such as those in the FSA and Deodeca. | |||
'''Perspective''': It's worth noting that while territories are guarded as if they're a matter of utmost seriousness, at the end of the day, they are just lines on a website. The stringent requirements can make it feel like a high-stakes endeavor, when in reality, it's a platform for creative expression and community building. | |||
'''Suggested Changes:''' I propose that we consider a more balanced approach that encourages participation without compromising quality. A review of the current application process could benefit the platform and its community immensely. | |||
'''Conclusion:''' I hope this discussion will serve as a starting point for reevaluating the territory application process. I have the utmost respect for our admin team, especially those with deep expertise in HRATE, and I believe their insights could be invaluable in this discussion. | |||
{{Unsigned|AustinBoath}} | |||
: The new territory application process is definitely different! It's good to remember that the current territory application process, while not perfect, is the product of a long reevaluation of the former territory application process (7 days of mapping in a blue territory was the only prerequesite for the former). To me, the goals of the current process, in response to community feedback, were to 1) raise the quality of mapping around the world overall 2) allow community input on new territory applications 3) reduce territory cleanup from short-term territory occupations. So I think the current process does ask for 1) long-term commitment 2) willingness to improve mapping quality and 3) consideration of how the new territory will integrate into the region; and it does align well with the idea that our world is a creative, communal, quality work of art rather than simply "lines on a website." [[User:Chazeltine|Chazeltine]] ([[User talk:Chazeltine|talk]]) 13:49, 21 September 2023 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 13:49, 21 September 2023
Forums → Standards and documentation → Standards and documentation/Reevaluating the Application Process in OpenGeoFiction
Discussion: Reevaluating the Territory Application Process in Opengeofiction
Hello fellow mappers,
I wanted to open a discussion about the current territory application process in Opengeofiction. While the platform has thrived under the guidance of our dedicated admin team, there are aspects of the territory application process that I believe could be reconsidered for the benefit of the community.
The Current State: The existing vetting process, although effective in preserving quality, has set a high barrier to entry. While there's no formal requirement of 1000 hours of mapping experience, the intense scrutiny from the admin team often makes it feel as if one needs that level of expertise to even be considered for a territory.
The Concern: This rigorous process seems to discourage many talented mappers. There's a sentiment among some that it's easier to pass a driving test than to secure a piece of virtual land on Opengeofiction. This is particularly concerning given the number of vacant territories, such as those in the FSA and Deodeca.
Perspective: It's worth noting that while territories are guarded as if they're a matter of utmost seriousness, at the end of the day, they are just lines on a website. The stringent requirements can make it feel like a high-stakes endeavor, when in reality, it's a platform for creative expression and community building.
Suggested Changes: I propose that we consider a more balanced approach that encourages participation without compromising quality. A review of the current application process could benefit the platform and its community immensely.
Conclusion: I hope this discussion will serve as a starting point for reevaluating the territory application process. I have the utmost respect for our admin team, especially those with deep expertise in HRATE, and I believe their insights could be invaluable in this discussion.
—Unsigned comment by AustinBoath (talk).
- The new territory application process is definitely different! It's good to remember that the current territory application process, while not perfect, is the product of a long reevaluation of the former territory application process (7 days of mapping in a blue territory was the only prerequesite for the former). To me, the goals of the current process, in response to community feedback, were to 1) raise the quality of mapping around the world overall 2) allow community input on new territory applications 3) reduce territory cleanup from short-term territory occupations. So I think the current process does ask for 1) long-term commitment 2) willingness to improve mapping quality and 3) consideration of how the new territory will integrate into the region; and it does align well with the idea that our world is a creative, communal, quality work of art rather than simply "lines on a website." Chazeltine (talk) 13:49, 21 September 2023 (UTC)