Might be useful to go into more details on what this topic is and how it works.
---- The old way ----
Prior to recent times, scenarios were designed in private by the CM team. There was no public input. Once the writeup was publicly posted there were no further changes allowed, and suggestions were not wanted (as there would be no changes anymore anyway).
---- What I wanted to try ----
1. Have the players vote on the theme of the battle.
2. The scenario team works up a starter design for whatever won the vote.
3. The scenario team posts the starter design/writeup and opens the "scenario design" topic, where the design process works as follows.
---- The design topic ----
In the design topic, everyone can post comments and suggestions and discuss. During this process, if the scenario team sees a suggestion that it agrees is a significant improvement, it puts a change into the writeup. Not every suggestion will be considered an improvement. During the process, the scenario team itself may come up with new ideas. If a change seems like it will be highly contentions, the scenario team may choose, in its own discretion, to seek approval of both side CO's before putting it in. Throughout, the scenario team can answer questions and explain why a change is (or is not) made, giving people a view into the process.
The purpose of the design topic is:
-- To get more eyeballs on the design looking for errors and significant design flaws.
-- To get suggestions for the scenario team to consider.
-- For players to see explanations of why a change was or was not put into the writeup.
-- To serve as a sounding board for ideas.
-- To give players at least some input where there was zero before.
What is not the purpose of the design topic (and wouldn't be allowed even if I thought it was a good idea, which I don't):
-- To turn the design process into design by public vote.
-- For the scenario team to abdicate its responsibility to determine the final design.
-- To obligate the scenario team to implement every suggestion.
-- To obligate the scenario team to agree with you.
-- To remove the scenario team's right (that everyone has) to reconsider or come up with new ideas.
---- Analogy ----
You know in a scenario when the CO puts up a "strategy discussion" topic? Folks can post ideas on what the orders should be, what the strengths and weaknesses are, but ultimately it is the CO's responsibility to choose what to do, what suggestions to implement, which ones not to? And then, once he puts out the final orders, folks accept those as the final orders? You know how in scenarios decent players don't act up if their strategy suggestions aren't implemented by the CO in the orders? You know how in scenarios decent players don't bitterly complain about the final orders, calling the CO dictatorial, threatening to quit because the CO didn't put in their idea? You now how people don't tell the CO that they and four other players voted and decided that the orders should include this or that?
Well, that's how this topic should go.
Thoughts at random, based on some recent posts I've seen:
-- If you think this process is dictatorial, maybe you didn't participate in scenarios prior to 2016, where the process was approximately infinity percent more dictatorial.
-- If you don't like this system, your alternative is the old way. No CM but me wants anything but the old way, and I'm starting think they are right.
-- The scenario team has the right to have opinions, too.
-- The scenario team is not obligated to agree with your opinion, even if you and some buddies think it's great, even if you get all emotional about it.
-- We are not playing 5-year-old games like "you said, 'X is great', so you can't ever say 'after thinking about it some more, I don't think X is great anymore'. You are stuck with X once you say it!"
-- We don't have design by vote. The scenario team's responsibility is still to do what it thinks is best.
What makes you mad is if the scenario team doesn't do what you want. But the scenario team makes changes or not only because we honestly think doing it makes a better scenario. We don't want to make you mad. We'll try not to. But we will do what we think makes a better scenario whether you get mad about it or not. Ultimately, you decide if you are going to be mad or not. If you can choose not to, you'll be happier.
