C&C 101

[Omicron]

So after seeing the new Rating Activities sub-forum being created, I was thinking, maybe we could do a similar thing for C&C. C&C is an incredibly active sub-forum, with plenty of new potential contributors. However, something I have been noticing lately is some rather sub-par quality analyses, not just in content, but in writing as well. I think that having a sort of C&C "tutoring" forum would really help new potential contributors to learn the ropes of C&C, and instead of getting off to a bad start, jump right in and excel. The reason I am proposing this is because I care a lot about C&C, and devote most of my time on Smogon to C&C. Smogon prides itself on quality content for users to peruse, and from what I've seen, there's been some less-than-satisfactory work going on-site, and there's only so much the GP and QC teams can do; ultimately, it's in the hands of the writer.

While you may think that it may be easier to simply direct a newbie to a C&C mod, or seasoned contributors for advice, I think it is highly inefficient, especially as most of them have other things they need to do. I do realize that there are several articles in the Smog regarding the processes in C&C, but I don't think it's enough for most new users. I think potential new contributors would really benefit from live interaction with seasoned contributors and moderators in an environment where they can ask questions and have their stuff evaluated, etc. For example, we could have several different subsections dealing with the respective stages of analysis writing, i.e. Skeleton formatting, content, and QC, writing, grammar, and GP, etc. It would also be a lot easier to make it clear what is required of any potential new C&Cer.

I know this may not seem "necessary" atm, but I think it's a really good idea to draw more people into the C&C forum, and improve the quality overall.

Thoughts?

[Metal Bagon]

I'd certainly sign up for it. It would help me stay active in that forum as well.

[Komodo]

People should have the sense to look at the standards threads which clearly say what is expected in C&C. There is also #C&C on IRC, which people can help out on. Not that I think this is a terrible idea, it would be nice to have a group of regulars in C&C who are willing to give advice, and I'm sure it's somewhat under the 'job description' of contributor, helping potential contributors.

[Oglemi*]

We already tried this sort of thing, and it was a disaster tbh. The problem arises from the fact that analyses take time, far longer than making a rate as in RMT or just battling like in Tutoring 101. This makes it almost impossible to do in live time (I wouldn't want to sit on IRC for hours on end just to work with someone writing an analysis).

If you could find a way to structure the tutoring in a way where the tutee would stay active and actually commit to the tutoring, then it could probably work. But for the most part I just don't see that happening.

And tbh, most of the poor writing in C&C stems from either the writer being bad at English, not actually knowing the metagame that they're writing for, or just being lazy/easily distracted. None of which can really be fixed through C&C tutoring, unless of course we have some bilingual people who'd be able to help those people who have poor English and want to contribute.

[Omicron]

Ok, didn't see that archived thread...

But in any case, is there a way we can make some sort of archive of really well-written analyses / articles for reference for newer users?

This is just an idea, but I suppose it might not work in practice...

Perhaps we could get a few willing contributors / mods to open themselves to C&C "tutoring"? We might not necessarily need a sub-forum, but I think it could be a start, to see if it works that way, and if not, then so be it.

I'll try to come up with a more cohesive structure sometime by the end of this month and see what happens from there.

[NixHex]

This is the third time I've tried to type this because my phone keeps being dumb so I'll be brief. We shoud encourage users to a) lurk more and b) go onto #c&c and ask for help. By a) I mean read analyses that have received at least 1 qc stamp to see how skeletons work, then read ones in copyediting to see what's expected in writing. By b) I mean advertising #c&c more, like in the sub forum description. Regardless, I am on irc 60% of my day and am willing to help with articles.

I stop typing now.

[Omicron]

Actually Komodo and I were discussing this on IRC, and we (mostly him) came up with the idea of an SQSA thread for C&C, similar to the threads in DST.

I think that is a great idea, and should definitely be implemented.

But regardless, Komodo and I will still be trying to find a way to make this work. Somehow. :P

[Berserker Lord]

While this doesn't seem like a bad idea, the whole problem is that nearly everything that a C&C 101 would provide is already handled by announcements and the rules. Battling 101 works because building a Pokemon team actually takes some knowledge of the metagame and how some Pokemon and sets work with each other, which good Pokemon battlers can teach the new people. The only thing I see C&C 101 honestly doing anything of worth is in writing, but as Oglemi said, it takes much more time to write up an analysis then rating a team or battling. And becoming a better writer is honestly achieved more through a combination of writing analysis' and the GP team pointing out your errors.

[bojangles**]

We have tried C&C 101 in the past and it just doesn't work. Generally speaking, there are 3 problems people have encountered if they don't do well in C&C:

1. They do not have a good grasp of the metagame. People who fall into this category would be best to sign up for Battling 101, as any C&C tutoring in this area would encroach on that territory.

2. They do not have a good grasp of the English language. It is not feasible for us to try and teach English to contributors. Unfortunately, we have limited resources and manpower, and this is not a good use of it. I would direct you to do some research on the internet (sites like Purdue have good english rule databases) or take some classes in real life.

3. They are inactive. Presumably if you are around to do C&C tutoring you would be around to do your analysis. Otherwise, this is something that can't be helped.

With that, I'm going to say that this probably just isn't going to happen.