Quick poll regarding "scenario design" topic

[Brooke]

I think all CM's but me consider a "scenario design" topic to be a bad idea -- because they see too many players losing it.  I'm wondering if even players want it anymore.

Please pick one of the letters below.

A.  I want the old way.  (The old way was as follows.  The writeup was done in private by the CM team, with no public discussion or input.  Then it was posted to the public, and there were no changes allowed afterward.  Suggestions about the design were not wanted, as there would be no further changes regardless.)

B.  I want the current way.

C.  I want a "scenario design" topic in a private forum, where it would work as follows.  Anyone initially requesting entry gets in.  Anyone who gets all hot under the collar gets his post replaced with "please make your case more calmly".  If a person gets too many of those "calm down" reminders, he gets removed from the forum.

[bgoldy]

A. Haven’t flown scenarios long but I’m a simple kinda guy. Gimme a set of planes to pick from and tell me where I’m going is all I need

[TWCAxew]

A. Or C. To much passive aggression... I know it comes from a good heart but it separate our community and in the end no one would care anymore...

DutchVII

[Delirium]

I would suggest letter 'C'.

I would of had recommended 'A' years ago when we had massive numbers. The numbers on the game have declined so much it makes a general discussion more manageable and allows for the few players that are left to have their voices heard.

edit: If you do go for option 'C', I would recommend you add EVERYONE that requests access. Allow past misgivings that have occurred to be forgotten and attempt to move on. That goes for BOTH parties!

[TheBug]

Fire the current CMs, get new blood in there and go with A.

[perdue3]

C. Not many of us were fans of A.

[asterix]

B

Because A means people just leave and not say anything because nothing will be changed anyway. C means less publicity and this forum already has someone to remind users the rules etc, just report to moderator.

[Guppy35]

Having been on both sides of the fence I think you are damned no matter what way you go as someone will be angry.

Seems to be the best compromise is to have a private forum where the CMs and the CO and XO for both sides can meet to discuss concerns would be the best bet.  If the CO of each side wants to add additional people to that forum, then they can bring it to the group and let them know why.

It falls on the CO for each side to then sell it to their team based on the decisions the CO and XO had in the design discussion.

There is no perfect way obviously, but too many cooks make it just as miserable as how it was when it was just the CM design team having to present it.

[Nefarious]

As I've recommended already when I was still a CM.

1) Come up with a design or completed writeup.
2) Share amongst CM team and privately amongst community members who you would personally like input from like Guppy, Devil, and others.
3) Make any adjustments you feel might be needed through thier input.
4) Share write up publicly and open registration for public.

I never understood the voting and design by community aspect. If you want help from someone knowledgeable ask them directly. Don't bog yourself down with negativity.

[BFOOT1]

edit: If you do go for option 'C', I would recommend you add EVERYONE that requests access. Allow past misgivings that have occurred to be forgotten and attempt to move on. That goes for BOTH parties!

+1 

[BFOOT1]

As I've recommended already when I was still a CM.

1) Come up with a design or completed writeup.
2) Share amongst CM team and privately amongst community members who you would personally like input from like Guppy, Devil, and others.
3) Make any adjustments you feel might be needed through thier input.
4) Share write up publicly and open registration for public.

I never understood the voting and design by community aspect. If you want help from someone knowledgeable ask them directly. Don't bog yourself down with negativity.

Couldn’t agree more. Have set dates in each calendar year with theaters already chosen and hash out the write ups.

[1ijac]

C

One-eye

[SEseph]

D.

CM Team has several scenario write-ups ready. Community Votes on the Title/Topic. Scenario Write-up is issued to community immediately after vote concludes. After a week, CO's may be selected allowing time to decide if they want to, and if they can assemble a team they feel strong about. If Multiple CO requests, we do a simple lottery with an RNG. Once CO's are selected, if there are ANY concerns, they may then bring them up to the CM heading the event (Who, by the way, would be in a role of coordination, not aviation for the event). No changes will be made without getting input from the community unless it is a game altering flaw. Allow a week. The Teams will have enough to start planning while they wait for this process, so no time is lost.

Do this twice a year. MAYBE 3 times since the write-ups are already there. We don't need more, nor is there adequate time.


Those choices, A and B, are black and white, then you gave C as a suicide pill.

[Delirium]

Seems to be the best compromise is to have a private forum where the CMs and the CO and XO for both sides can meet to discuss concerns would be the best bet.  If the CO of each side wants to add additional people to that forum, then they can bring it to the group and let them know why.

I agree with you on the context, but from what I have seen of the scenario community on the forums, a few people are unhappy and feel their opinions are not being heard. If you have only CMs and CO/XOs in discussion of scenario design it will continue the thought that the scenario design is a "good old boys club" as CMs choose the CO/XO for each event.

[Devil 505]

B - total transparency.

C would only be acceptable to me if the design forum was opened to viewing by everyone when the side forums are.