Okay. Hereeeee's the deal. The staff are currently discussing whether or not to be open with the users based on two factors: How the community will take said news, and how certain people might react to it. So here is the rundown. Some of the staff think we should use 'Staff Advisors', people who hear the news for sitewide changes that affect the users and tell them by word-of-mouth. This is a selective process that will allow a select few to spread the idea slowly among the community instead of releasing it all at once. The idea is that instead of releasing the whole shibang on the forum in one blast, we release it slowly. This allows user feedback to come in at a slower pace instead of all at once like in the New Rules thread that was made a few months ago in winter. We all saw how THAT went down. This is the deal though. Some staff members want to only give partial information rather than the whole thing so as to prevent misunderstandings and the lot. My questions to you are 2 simple ones. Would you rather we let you all know at once so everyone knows what's going down with the site, or would you rather have Staff Advisors letting you know? Also, would you rather have partial information or know the whole thing before you COULD go and tell people about it? Leave your feedback below. We look forward to your answers! EDIT 2: A tiny update for you guys. After much discussion, some of the staff have changed their minds about this, and here is why. By using Staff Advisors (Users appointed by the Staff to spread information), we are giving them information that can be misinterpreted and demonized. For example, we tell them the idea. Person A tells person B, but person B thinks that Reason A means something else then it really does. So person B tells person C what HE thinks is right, and then we have a problem. This idea has a lot of problems. Demonization of facts and misinterpretation are huge factors here. With these new things coming to light, do you still think it's a good idea? With a Bulk Forum Post telling everyone, it allows less room for misinterpretation and demonization of the facts. Posted without staff permission, felt the community needed to answer this for sure. EDIT: Partial Information means the information we feel you guys should know. NOT intentionally withholding it.
I'd prefer to have a staff adviser tell me, then I can tell one or two of my friends, I think that way is better so as to avoid a mad stampede of feedback.
Considering the backlash the members of this website have been known to give, and the number of people who have been leaving exactly for that aforementioned reason, I think this would be an extremely good idea.
Not sure how my opinion fits in, being a staff member now and all, but I like the idea of Staff Advisors. However, I'm not much for the notion of partial information. This idea will easily, and I mean VERY easily, be construed as secretive and possibly manipulative in nature. As this is not the intent, better not start off on the wrong foot. I believe if Staff Advisors are go, they should release full information and nothing less.
Yes, Staff Advisors would be a good idea But I think the Advior would have to get the full run down on whats going to happen, allowing them to put it into "layman's terms" if necessary.
I agree with Yami. If there is staff advisors they should repeat every little detail to avoid anything which could turn into a bad situation.
I'm a little confused. Does it really matter who tells us. Is that even a staff advisor then, it just sounds like hearing it through the grapevine. The whole thing. What good it partial information. *************************************** How is this a staff advisor, from what I see, their job would basically be the telephone game. Staff tells them something, they in-turn tell members. Why the go between guy?
It's so the ideas we come up with can be exposed to the community gradually rather than all at once. This way we can deal with problems that crop up once at a time instead of having an uproar on the forums if the idea isn't all too well received.
Then tell us yourself. There is no need for another guy in the middle. What is the difference if Foxy tells us or someone like Rada? The info still gets out to the members.
You bring up an excellent point Echo, and that's why I'm not really 'Fond' of the idea. If anything, the only reason I support it is because if we do it all at once, we get so much input, positive or negative, that it's hard to handle.
The difference being how fast the idea is spread in proportion to the time it takes us to actually do so. I'd rather have a few people told, so they can tell, and so on rather than having the staff individually spread the message because we need to maintain our focus on the fixing any problems that could possibly crop up. Unless you were implying that we just simply be direct and do as we normally do, then I've spent my time explaining a moot point XD Anyway, we'll take your opinion into consideration.
At least then it's all in the open. You don't even need the advisors. They aren't necessary to deliver the information. I have a feeling that this really won't do much anyway, it seems when ideas like this are suggested, people get all excited for a few hours/days. Then is cools down and fades away, forgotten by most. That could lead to misinformation. I like this method. MOD: This is what's happening The users: YAY/BOO It works fine to me. This advisor thing only seems to complicate matters.
I approve of the Staff Advisor idea, and letting you guys know about our progress on various ideas in smaller doses at a time. HOWEVER: When relaying this sort of information to a huge group like a forum community, there will always be people who agree and people who are against. This WILL create huge tension between members sometimes. I think this was always the main reason for the so-called secrecy on things. We simply didn't want to burden you with any of it. So i ask to each and everyone of you, members and staff members alike: Can you handle a proper and mature discussion?
And that's exactly why the staff has always had reservations about sharing information that they themselves are still in the middle of discussing.
In my own opinion, I would prefer we were told directly and not by advisors. However, it seems that most of the users of this site harbor better reactions towards advisory. I really don't care how it goes in either way, as long as you don't decide to blow off both and not even tell us when you change something.
