The next CDI is apparently going to be a process evolution thread where this will be front and center for discussion 
.
I tend to agree with calving off new threads after major topic shifts. The current thread is the first beneficiary of this, having emerged from a thread that was even broader but came to focus on Ascended gear as a single aspect of vertical progression.
While a certain amount of patience is required in light of the holidays which I think lead to the current thread running on as long as it has, I’d very much like to see threads have a shorter window they are open (‘shorter’ meaning 7-10 days in my perfect world). As new threads branch off they run on a fresh timer.
But, I disagree with shuffling them all into a separate forum while they’re active. I think their significance and even existence is still too new of a thing to demand that those with fresh viewpoints also be so knowledgeable as to wander into a sub-forum quite apart from the proper home of those topics that interest them.
I will point out the irony that if…
- Make a CDI forum. Please. It’s time. Only developers (maybe community moderators?) can start topics in this forum. A subforum will be a generalized idea, like what we’ve been doing thus far with the threads themselves. So, for example, we’d have an open subforum called CDI: Character Progression- Horizontal Discussion, and one discussion created with the same title, more or less. That’s where we start from. Maybe sticky the master thread, if necessary.
…were to be enacted this thread itself would be impossible to launch in the same forum as the CDI thread/discussions it refers to. Likewise the separate poster-maintained tracker thread could not have been started, flourished, and eventually received the official nod.
I favor we continue to have the latitude to start threads like this . It may be a bit rambunctious, but vitality often is.
(edited by Nike.2631)
The next CDI is apparently going to be a process evolution thread where this will be front and center for discussion
I tend to agree with calving off new threads after major topic shifts. The current thread is the first beneficiary of this, having emerged from a thread that was even broader but came to focus on Ascended gear as a single aspect of vertical progression.
While a certain amount of patience is required in light of the holidays which I think lead to the current thread running on as long as it has, I’d very much like to see threads have a shorter window they are open (‘shorter’ meaning 7-10 days in my perfect world). As new threads branch off they run on a fresh timer.
But, I disagree with shuffling them all into a separate forum while they’re active. I think their significance and even existence is still too new of a thing to demand that those with fresh viewpoints also be so knowledgeable as to wander into a sub-forum quite apart from the proper home of those topics that interest them.
I will point out the irony that if…
- Make a CDI forum. Please. It’s time. Only developers (maybe community moderators?) can start topics in this forum. A subforum will be a generalized idea, like what we’ve been doing thus far with the threads themselves. So, for example, we’d have an open subforum called CDI: Character Progression- Horizontal Discussion, and one discussion created with the same title, more or less. That’s where we start from. Maybe sticky the master thread, if necessary.
…were to be enacted this thread itself would be impossible to launch in the same forum as the CDI thread/discussions it refers to. Likewise the separate poster-maintained tracker thread could not have been started, flourished, and eventually received the official nod.
I favor we continue to have the latitude to start threads like this
I don’t think it’s irony, in that I feel like this thread would have been entirely unnecessary had these things already been enacted. However, your point about Lost Witch and the fantastic summary-tracker thread is noted and entirely valid. That thread is the main reason I mentioned the idea of community moderators.
I do take your point about vitality, and I see how even that sort of limitation (even were that role welcomed, as I have rudely assumed it would be) would strangle some of that. It’s a risk/reward issue, ultimately. I’m not necessarily sure I share your belief that having the forum be limited only in the creation of topics would kill the plant, rather than merely shape it a bit, but I do acknowledge the risk, there.
Only a week for discussion? I could see limiting some of the in-depth discussion threads (Sub-classes, for a direct example from my proposal) to a week, but I’d feel gutted over these vast topics even getting so little as 2 weeks of attention.
Maybe a compromise could be reached by way of not locking down the forum the way they archive the living story forum when it expires, and having developer focus shift to whatever the new topic is. To me, it seems pointless to skim the surface of what needs to improve without offering valid feedback on how to improve it, and it takes time to sort out both aspects of that, as well as figuring out what is pie in the sky, and what might be reasonably expected.
I’m genuinely curious about how you perceive these initiatives- do you see them as brainstorming sessions? (I mean this in a polite tone, I hope that is coming through.) I see them as a sort of Socratic Circle, which I suppose aren’t lengthy by definition, but that’s always how I imagine them- sort of a lengthy refining process. Anyway, it’s late and I am rambling. I’m really intrigued to hear more about how a week-long process might work.
Edit
I know the CDI process evaluation is next, but without knowing when that will be, and with my general impatience (as I am usually bursting to share my ideas), this thread was born. But I hope it doesn’t seem disrespectful of the process, because that was never my intention.
(edited by Guhracie.3419)
I have to admit that I can never keep up with the CDI threads, for the most part, after the first day. Once you leave the forum to sleep, eat, work, ..whatever, there are so many posts/pages to read, that it takes more time than is set aside for forum interaction just to catch up. Much less post anything.
I always just end up reading the Dev posts. I don’t feel I can really contribute much, because I am too far behind, or not informed enough with what has transpired in the thread.
Thus, some other method of CDI interaction would be beneficial…at least, to me.
Thanks for your hard work. =)
I am lucky enough to have the time to do this stuff, and I have not worked half as hard as many others in the thread (I really didn’t mean for the initial post to sound self-aggrandizing, and yet it does when I read it back). I feel like we are ALL having to work hard, but I didn’t want to make the assumption that everyone felt that way.
Thanks for your feedback- I also feel like I’m not up to date enough with the thread, when I do finally make my responses. It’s a large part of why I proposed this, as well. Oh, and thank you so much for the message about the difference between affect and effect. I cherish stuff like that. (Utter sincerity, since tone is hard to convey)
However, your point about Lost Witch and the fantastic summary-tracker thread is noted and entirely valid. That thread is the main reason I mentioned the idea of community moderators.
I imagine Chris Whiteside is experiencing relief that people are stepping up to assist in the process. Community support, chroniclers so far, is something I believe should be explored in the next Process Evolution.
I think we’re still at a point were support roles remain to be discovered; that we still have benefits to reap from remaining informal. I had my own issues getting stomped on for pushing the boundaries. I’d prefer to set no more of them than are strictly necessary – not because I know what wonderful thing could come of allowing that freedom, but because I don’t know .
Only a week for discussion? I could see limiting some of the in-depth discussion threads (Sub-classes, for a direct example from my proposal) to a week, but I’d feel gutted over these vast topics even getting so little as 2 weeks of attention.
And as the sophistication of the discourse has grown, I’m with you… But.
To me its one of the great stumbling blocks of the process that every thread reaches a length that works against it. They become so long that people feel embarrassed to contribute because they haven’t read 20-30 pages. Some master their discomfort and post anyway, but I think some really good insights are simply gone, lost to silence before a mountain of text that is terrifying. I say a week to ten days not because that’s the right amount of time, but because that seems about average for the length to reach the level where it becomes an impediment to discussion.
With branching threads and shorter windows I dream of an outcome where we see the same posts, but the Dev-Host comes in on page 12 and says “well what about this?” launching a new thread right there, running in parallel. We get the same posts (and more really) but they’re gathered under separate headers so the first thread can continue to promote discussion of the ‘first page topic’. Those who follow the branch stay focused on the newer topic… The second thread doesn’t end up laced with “I just read page 1 and have to say” posts after the tide has shifted. Hopefully never again does someone have to apologize for “I want to be a part of this, but I haven’t read the last 30 pages and I hope this is still of interest.” The first thread is still open and undivided if its the opening post that drew them into the exchange, and they have the newer threads if those are the topic/title that caught their eye.
I don’t know that it can be solved. I know it won’t be solved in one try. But I’m confident we can make it better .
I’m genuinely curious about how you perceive these initiatives- do you see them as brainstorming sessions? (I mean this in a polite tone, I hope that is coming through.) I see them as a sort of Socratic Circle, which I suppose aren’t lengthy by definition, but that’s always how I imagine them- sort of a lengthy refining process.
To me it’s music. Improvisational music. Jazz. I’m not shy about throwing ideas out but I also enjoy trying to introduce basic terms with an eye towards building a shared language that helps us all communicate better. I’m very pleased/proud that in the Horizontal Progression thread my fellow posters feel comfortable referring to “the plains-wurm test” when framing their own arguments and opinions. If the CDIs are Jazz, then that’s working the drums, offering a beat that helps the other musicians play together.
To stretch the analogy, I’d also say that when its showtime, the stage-hands may be unseen, the lighting crew invisible to the audience, but their craft is essential to the performance. Chroniclers and other friends of the CDIs make us all look better.
Edit
I know the CDI process evaluation is next, but without knowing when that will be, and with my general impatience (as I am usually bursting to share my ideas), this thread was born. But I hope it doesn’t seem disrespectful of the process, because that was never my intention.
Sharing your thoughts and putting them up for scrutiny can only enhance your performance when it comes time to step on the big CDI stage, draw forth your chosen instrument, and play like you mean it .