Referee White-Listing

Status
Not open for further replies.

Someoneelse

Why am I here?
Please read through Referee White-Listing discussion on page 1 of Feedback thread to get some background.

Frosty has proposed a change to the white-listing of refs from having to undertake Reffing 202 to another system:
Proposed White-Listing Process said:
1) PM the examiner all the matches you are currently reffing or that you reffed (without being subreffed) and finished in the past 2 months. PM ALL. If you sugarpick them, it is an automatic Rejection.
2) If there are enough matches done (parameter is 10-15 matches total - with some leeway for and against depending on the situation), examiner will check if the reffing done is minimally acceptable
3) To allow white-listing, the examiner should be convinced that:
a) The candidate pulls his share of reffing work here (benchmark is 8-10 3vs3 BT casual matches in 2 months. If you do primarily flashes, you will probably need more, but you can get the license doing only flashes (since they are a significant contribution to the training of the respective players). If you do primarily serious reffings (TLR, Raid, Gym and Tourney basically) you might get it with less. Self-reffed matches (except for the facilities where you play opponent and ref) won't count here).
b) The candidate can ref well enough to ref reliably casual 1vs1 or 2vs2
c) The candidate is not a john. While he can be DQ'd once or twice in the matches linked (or more if there is a reason), if he passes DQ constantly, he may be rejected under those grounds.
4) If the examiner is convinced, he gives a WhiteList license that is valid for 6 months. To renew the license, the candidate will need to repeat the process nearing the end of the period
5) If the examiner isn't convinced, he will reject the candidate, explaining his reasons. The candidate can apply again in one month.
Some sample questions to respond to:
  • Will this have a beneficial impact on ASB?
  • What is the impact on amounts of work for Reffing 202 tutors? Is Reffing 202 necessary?
  • Are there any potential problems with less competent refs becoming white-listed?
I'll try to track discussion in the OP. Fire away!
 

Frosty

=_=
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Lemme begin

- Will this have a beneficial impact on ASB?

We will have more flashes and more people (not beginners btw, usually people who have stuck around for time enough to get the ropes of reffing, so 6 months to one year of experience I think) getting faster training. Can't say that is "beneficial" in the end, as there are a lot of possible outcomes and variables. It will have a huge beficial impact on the mentorship program (read: me) though, as the workload necessary to keep up the whitelisting process will get infinitely smaller and more manageable.

- What is the impact on amounts of work for Reffing 202 tutors? Is Reffing 202 necessary?

Rage and No.

Seriously, the reason Reffing 202 is so rude is because the original white-listed approved process involved exploiting obscure mechanics. And while I certainly have overdone it, the point stands. Obscure mechanics are still mechanics that will be handled through one of two ways:
a) the rules cover it and you should read it
b) the rules don't cover it and you should panic (think about the interactions, make a ruling, ask around, panic).

I mean, regardless of the specific mechanic, obscure or not, that I trigger in a R202 battle, the "teaching" will always be "read handbook and NDA, if the rules cover it, apply them...if not, work something out and ask around and get a mod to agree with you since your ruling will be contested". I don't find overly necessary to have 6vs6 battle to teach you that. It is something all refs who do reffing for longer know about.

And, and this is the most important thing, it is the sort of teaching that will never take place on self-reffed matches. I mean, on self-reffed matches (usually flashes and usually for training), no one will ever engage in complicated stratagems to achieve victory, and if they do they should burn in hell the ref will usually just do anything and move without a dispute. Its a match where victory has no value (no KOC and it is a silly battle you can't really hold on your record with pride). So in the end, on R202, you are transmiting a teaching that proper experience will already give you (and on a more sane and healthy fashion) and that will be useless on the matches you will be able to do after passing it. You can't get more unnecessary than that.

- Are there any potential problems with less competent refs becoming white-listed?

White-listed matches are the lowest form of reffing, wrt the skills necessary. I intend to put on a "only registered refs can apply to white-listing" rule I forgot above, so the white-listed ref are presumable at least decent refs. But, while you can go beyond that, the extra skill won't show on white-listed matches. It won't make a difference. That difference that will be seen will result of more people being white-listed, not on their overall capacities. That is, assuming the rules of the self-reffeable matches stay as is.
 

ZhengTann

Nargacuga
is a Forum Moderator Alumnus
I have a question regarding points 3.a) and 4, though.
3.a) The candidate pulls his share of reffing work here (benchmark is 8-10 3vs3 BT casual matches in 2 months. If you do primarily flashes, you will probably need more, but you can get the license doing only flashes (since they are a significant contribution to the training of the respective players). If you do primarily serious reffings (TLR, Raid, Gym and Tourney basically) you might get it with less. Self-reffed matches (except for the facilities where you play opponent and ref) won't count here).

4) If the examiner is convinced, he gives a WhiteList license that is valid for 6 months. To renew the license, the candidate will need to repeat the process nearing the end of the period
Questions being:
  1. Who will be the examiners? Just one snowman? Because even with a 6-month valid period for white-listed self-reffing, that sounds like a lot of reading (10 to 15 past reffings per applicant, mind).
  2. Point 3.a) has a vague subjectivity about it. If question 1 is answered with "there will be more than 1 examiner", there's bound to be conflicting opinions between examiners sooner or later whether an applicant should be white-listed for self-reffing. Will there be, at least, a template of guidelines to start with?
Not to say I disagree to the whole premise - in fact, when Frosty talked about it on IRC I was convinced and on-board. But best if we can help Frosty to flesh the idea out.

I would prefer there to be at least 2 examiners right from the start - Frosty being the origin of the idea, and 1 more ASBer who's experienced and willing to carry on if Frosty had to be gone all of a sudden. To measure the criterion in 3.a) I'd start off with a ballpark scale ("two 3v3 Tower" equals "three 1v1 flashmatch" equals "one completed Pike" equals "one Gym/Tournament match" or some sort??)
 

Frosty

=_=
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
1) the idea is that all reffing tutors would be potential examiners. The candidate posts on the mentorship thread the links and reasoning for being white listed and I assign one of the tutors to do it. Or they pm me and I add the assigned tutor to it. Still thinking that through. But I intend to include as examiners people like you, gale, jaý, corgi and myself as starters. And put on a 5uc prize for it.

2) that is the hard part. I intend to have a point system of sorts, where the type of battle will mean x points with extra points for engaging flavor and for it being a tourney or gym match. Tlrs and raids would be worth the most points, depending on the level (normal or hard, training or legendary/uber). Unfinished matches would be worth a fraction of the total points as well as matches that end in dq and the examiner would be responsible for determining the fraction to be applied (1/4, 1/2, 3/4 or total). I still want to put the points as a flexible parameter since there are too many variables. I dont wanna see people flashing a gazillion matches 2 days before applying and expecting that to be enough, so the examiner would have liberty to demand more or less points or to deny whitelisting even with enough points. In that case I would need to approve of that proposal (which is why i am considering putting that as a PM). But yeah that is the general idea. The goal is to have both the prolific flash ref that did 15 1vs1 matches in 2 months and the tlr/raid ref that has 1 NM/Training completed reffing and 2 HM/Legendary over halfway to be equally elligible to whitelisting.
 

Frosty

=_=
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Lemme try to refine this proposal

Rules:
1)
The White-Listing process is to be conducted by the Reffing Mentorship program.
2) To be White-Listed the candidate must be a Registered Ref, prove that they is capable of reffing decently and that they had done their share of reffing for the community on the previous two months.
3) The Candidate fills in a form and signs up to be evaluated by a Reffing Tutor. The candidate joins the specific queue and can be picked by any of the reffing tutors, as well as the manager. Each tutor/manager can be in charge of only one evaluation at a time and must finish the one they picked before picking any other.
4) Once the tutor responsable for the evalution is decided upon, the candidate has one week to PM the tutor all the battles they have reffed or are reffing two months prior from the signup moment. The candidate must PM all of them and any sign of sugarpicking may result in disqualification.
5) The tutor evaluates each of those matches analysing mostly the calcs done (they should be mostly correctly), the rulings made (they should be either according to NDA/Handbook or, if not clear enough on the rules, they must have proper justification) as well as the overall format (Pokemon Summary, calcs etc in a clean fashion). Each battle deemed acceptable (not necessarily 100% perfect, merely acceptable for the purposes of the game) is awarded a certain amount of points, according to a point-conversion table to be determined by the managership according to the following order: Flash<<Battle Tower<Facilities (Pike, Hall, Sim)<Mentorship battles<Gym = Tournament<<Tournament Semifinals or Finals<<<<<TLR = Raid. Bigger battles are awarded more points and battles with good not-merely-tacked-on-to-get-extra-points flavor (subjective) will also net extra points. Ongoing matches or matches that ended in DQ will be awarded partial points based on the point they were at (1/4, 1/2, 3/4 or 1/1 the number of points of the full thing) (subjective analysis of the tutor). The tutor has 2 weeks to give a result.
6) To be white-listed, the player will need to achieve a specific number of points.
7) Excepcionally, The tutor may propose the manager to grant white-listing without the number of points or to reject it even with the number of points necessary. In both cases, the final decision is of the Manager.
8) Once white-listed, the license is valid for 6 months. Nearing the end of it (2 months before the expiration date is the earliest moment possible for this), the candidate should restart the process to renew it.
9) In case of rejection, the candidate must wait one month before trying again.
10) Each analysis, once done, is to be posted in its entirety on the main topic for data keeping and is awarded 5UC. The decision made by the tutor is not up for reviewing and any candidate may choose to not want a specific tutor to handle their application.
11) All current white-listed players have their licenses valid for 3 extra months, starting from the moment this proposal was approved of, before they need to renew them.


Something along those lines.

If you have any objection, say it and I'll adjust the proposal. If not, I'd like to send it to voting, if possible.

Finally: I don't want to create the point convertion table and put it through voting, or else changing it later would be a real drag.
 
Last edited:
So what happens once the candidate is white-listed and fails to renew the license within the period of six months due to the below reasons:
- Extended LOA for a couple of months that lead to other cases listed below (Exams / College)
- Battles have been started but couldn't be completed by end of six months
- Few more points remain before deadline but Gyms, Tourneys, TLRs and Sims are not available. (Hypothetical, but will this force them to request people for Tower / Flash battles?)
- Could the current white-listed players be considered as freshly renewed for the change and given six months from the moment this proposal is approved?
- If there is a time period Between expiry and renewal, would the white-listed players be treated as inactive, like the PCT Approvers?
 

Frosty

=_=
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
1) i recommend you try renew the license around 2 months from its expiration date. Just so you get it done in time. The nrw period will start when the original 6 months end anyway. LoA wont affect anything here nor will postpone the expiration date.
2) unfinished matches also count and i suspect refs that specialize in longer matches will manage to get their license through ongoing matches only.
3) if you have been reffing constantly during those 2 months you definitely wont need to rush nearing the deadline. The number of points required wont be high. If you need last minute matches to make it then i am afraid you will need to stay some weeks without a license. There will be no extensions since 2 months is being calcd to be enough time. Hell a prolific ref might do it in less than a month.
4) I decided on three months because i figured that would be enough time to get prepared. But this is one of those points where i dont particularly mind if the council votes a larger (or smaller) period really. As long it isnt over 6 months.
5) i see no reason to have that inactive category. I mean, those people would need to pass through the process to renew the license and they wont be able to self ref until then so i dont see the difference between them and regular people.
 

Frosty

=_=
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Let me provide you a slate while I am at it:

Question 1: Should the proposed rules be approved of?
a) Yes
b) No, because of XXXX

Question 2: For how long should the current white-listed refs have their licenses extended until they apply under new rules?
a) 2 months
b) 3 months
c) 4 months
d) 5 months
e) 6 months
f) No time at all
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top