Policy Review Discussing and Slating Concepts

DougJustDoug

Knows the great enthusiasms
is a Site Content Manageris a Top Artistis a Programmeris a Forum Moderatoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnus
Moderator
We have a completely new process for submitting and approving Concepts, as was recently concluded in this PR thread. In the future, all Concepts submissions will be handled in this new subforum. However, it has still not been decided exactly how we will handle slating and/or discussing Concepts at the beginning of each CAP project. That's what we need to determine here in this PR thread.

Here are a few things we know already, that are not up for debate:

We will not accept new submissions for CAP Concepts at the start of a CAP project.
The purpose of the new Concept Workshop is to allow us more time and structure to vet Concepts appropriately before they are used as the basis of a CAP project. So we will not be vetting new Concepts, in the Concept Workshop or elsewhere, when a new CAP creation project is launched. We may even lock the Concept Workshop for any posts while the Concept is being selected at the start of a new CAP.

The Topic Leader will select the slate of Concepts for the Concept Poll.
This is no different than in the past. The only difference is that the TL will select from the list of Approved Concepts in the Concept Workshop, instead of selecting from all the Concept Submissions in the Concept Submissions thread like in the past (Remember: there will not be a Concept Submission thread for each CAP creation project!)

The community will vote to determine the winning Concept for each CAP creation project.
No different than the past. This is probably obvious to everyone, but just in case all this talk of "overhauling the Concept process" made anyone think we will not still have a democratic poll -- rest assured, the community WILL ultimately choose the Concept for each project.​

The main open question that we need to decide:

Should we have an open discussion of any Concepts at the start of each CAP project?

Yes, there will be plenty of discussion of concepts in the Concept Workshop prior to the start of a CAP project. And yes, those discussions in the Workshop will continue after a Concept has been chosen for a CAP creation project, since the Concept Workshop is an ongoing, perpetual process. And yes, the TL will determine the slate of concepts for an individual project. But should there be a project-specific discussion thread opened in the main CAP forum prior to the Concept Poll?

Pros: We generally discourage lobbying in poll threads, so I could imagine the community may want to have some opportunity to discuss the slated concepts prior to the vote. We could just tell people, "That's what the Concept Workshop is for. If you didn't participate there beforehand, then make sure to do so next time." But that might be perceived as us preventing democracy, shoving a slate down the community's throat, and in general inciting the whole "row row fight tha powa" crowd that loves righteous indignation causes like this in CAP. A discussion thread probably curbs that quite a bit.

Cons: We subvert the purpose of the Concept Workshop. Any new discussion invariably invites people to rehash all the points already covered in the workshop, question whether the approvals were valid or not, backdoor new Concept submissions ideas, etc. I'm sure a TON of people will simply post new submissions just like always, mainly because they don't know about the new process, or are intentionally ignoring it. It could possibly be a total mess.

Here is a list of various options for handling a discussion thread:

The TL lists the slate in the OP of the thread, and asks the community to comment on the slate and lobby for or against their favorites.

The TL lists the options under consideration, and asks the community for comments to help them decide their final slate.

The discussion could be completely open and the TL asks the community to survey the Approved Concepts in the Concept Workshop and comment on their faves. Then the TL chooses a slate based on that feedback.

We don't have any discussion thread at all. The CAP project launches with the Concept Poll.
If we go with this option -- The OP of the poll may or may not link to the discussion threads in the Concept Workshop, depending on how much we want to invite people to look at the details of past discussions. No matter what we decide on linking the workshop threads from the poll OP or not, we will NOT be deleting or hiding any threads or posts in the workshop (this was suggested in the last PR thread, iirc). That would be horrible optics and does not promote community effort.

Maybe I'm missing some options or issues, so feel free to point them out. But hopefully this frames the policy discussion sufficiently for us to move to a swift conclusion.
 

ginganinja

It's all coming back to me now
is a Community Leader Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
I exchanged a few words over IRC, but I really like Option 2 at the moment.

Options 1 and 3 I don't particularly like because it encourages lobbying / voting for favourites. Technically, there isn't anything particularly wrong with this, but campaigning has been a large part of CAPs history, and I would really like to pick an option that didn't really encourage this. Don't get me wrong, I can see the pro's of the options, I just don't like its negatives very much.

I really, really want to get behind Option 4, mostly because I think sometimes you just need to say "These are your options, suck it up and vote". That said, community discussion is a huge part of CAP, and, despite all the problems you have with bad posting etc etc, I think community discussion is far too central to the CAP process to be left out. Furthermore, I can see most TLs wanting a little more advice when selecting a concept, since it defines where we go for the next 4 months or so.

So I'm left with Option 2 which restricts what the community can discuss, while providing much needed discussion/advice/whatever for the TL, and (hopefully) not allowing campaigning and all those other irksome things. Its potentially one of the more balanced options out there, which is why I tend to favour it more.

Despite this, my personal preference is to leave the format up to the TL of each process to decide. I don't think we could create a 100% "correct" format just from this thread, and most TLs have different ways of doing things, and would appreciate the flexibility of choosing whatever format they feel most comfortable with.
 

HeaLnDeaL

Let's Keep Fighting
is an Artistis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnus
I think I agree with everything ginga just said. I know, I'm shocked too.

Realistically, the old concept submission thread was mostly for... well, submissions. Occasionally there were a few comments regarding some of the submissions, but by and large it seemed to be a pile of user's own ideas. Realistically, Option 4 probably wouldn't miss out on that much concept discussion simply because there wasn't a whole lot of it going on in the forums to begin with.

That said, going right to a poll puts a lot of power in the TL's hands. Really, I don't think this in itself is all too bad. But allowing users to have at least some say in what reaches the final slate seems to be in line with the community goals of CAP. As it sounds now, I think Option 2 is perfectly reasonable, and I support it the most out of the options listed. I definitely would imagine that Option 2's discussion thread would be shorter than the concept submission threads of the past, and it would promote actually discussing the concepts rather than just submitting them. In the long run, we probably will save a bit of time while simultaneously promoting better conversations.
 
Last edited:

jas61292

used substitute
is a Community Contributoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Just going to agree with ginga and HeaL here. Option 2 sounds ideal to me, as it allows for actual discussion of concepts, and gives the community some influence, while at the same time keeping the discussion more focused that it would otherwise be.
 

DetroitLolcat

Maize and Blue Badge Set 2014-2017
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnus
I like both Option 2 and Option 3. CAP is all about providing opportunities for users to discuss the direction of the project, so any option that places slating before discussion is against what CAP stands for. In every step of the process, the discussion comes before the slate because there is no reason to discuss a slate that's already been decided. That rules out Option 1. Option 4 completely removes the community from the slating process and forces the TL to decide the direction of the project without hearing what the community wants to work on. Option 4 isn't fair to the community or the TL. There is no reason to remove the discussion element from the slating process, so I see Options 2 and 3 as the only viable choices.

Options 2 and 3 are so similar that it doesn't matter to me which one we go with. One starts with just a long list of Approved Concepts, the other starts with a list of Approved Concepts that the TL likes. Judging by what can happen if the TL dislikes the Concept, I guess Option 2 is the safer choice, but I'm pretty sure if we went with Option 3 the first thing a TL would do is narrow the list down to Concepts he or she likes.
 

Ignus

Copying deli meat to hard drive
Out of the options listed only I think only 1st and 3rd actually make any sense when it comes to being applied to the project. The second option partially undermines the purpose of CQC in the first place - asking for last minute changes in the approved concepts could force us in to a position where all the work that was put in by the CQC team is reversed - and even the smallest changes to the concept could be detrimental to the health of the project in later stages.

Furthermore, I feel like the second option could lead to changes that the original creator of the concept may dislike or disagree with - and while it wasn't specifically mentioned who would decide on the final form of the concepts, this may lend too much power to the TL. I can't think of a single other stage where the topic leader is allowed to edit someone else's design choices - you don't see edited movepools after they've already been created.
Edit: With the clarification below I'm willing to get behind 2 as well. As long as avoiding change in the final submissions (or in their original interpretation during CQC) is being accounted for during discussion I'm perfectly fine with the option. My mistake for misinterpreting.

Just my thoughts.
 
Last edited:

DougJustDoug

Knows the great enthusiasms
is a Site Content Manageris a Top Artistis a Programmeris a Forum Moderatoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnus
Moderator
I should clarify that NONE of the options I presented were intended to allow for Concepts to be CHANGED as a result of a project-specific discussion thread. The project discussion about the Concepts will be to comment on the positives and negatives of the Concepts as they were written and approved. If people suggest modifications to Concepts under consideration in a specific CAP project, those posts should be moderated.

If anyone in this PR thread thinks it would be a GOOD thing to allow Concepts to be modified in a project-specific discussion -- speak up. Otherwise, I'll assume we all agree that we don't want to discuss changing Approved Concepts at the start of a given CAP.

Yes, there will still be a Concept Assessment after a Concept is chosen. And yes, the results of some Concept Assessments can grey the line as to whether they actually CHANGE the Concept or not. And yes, the TL could face some weird exceptional case that requires them to propose altering a Concept for whatever reason.

But under NORMAL circumstances, we should assume that Concepts will be altered/edited ONLY during the Concept QC Process in the Concept Workshop -- NOT during any steps of a CAP creation project.
 

nyttyn

From Now On, We'll...
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnus
I'd say option 2 is probably the best bet, since TLs will inevitably have concepts they'll refuse to slate, for various reasons (feeling they're incapable of doing it justice is the most common one). Option three is nice but then people will throw a hissy fit if we ever have a situation where a concept gains hype that doesn't actually wind up being slated for whatever reason. Option four is way too anti democratic so it can go burn in a fire. Option one just seems like a more direct version of option three, with pros and cons to that (pros being all the feedback in one place, cons being all the feedback in one place, so it's harder to keep track of feedback of individual concepts).

so yeah let's go with option 2, that's my vote
 

Qwilphish

when everything you touch turns to gold
Like mostly everyone else Option 2 is the best because it allows for the community to see the options on the table and from that, decide exactly which ones they are willing to not do, rather than them choosing which ones they would rather do as with Options 1 and 3. This approach reduces, hopefully, the chances of an Option being chosen through bandwagon during this discussion stage while still coming to a more concise poll.

Option 4 could work as the Concept Workshop really does do a lot of work for weeding out the "bad" concepts, but I do enjoy the fact that Option 2 forces the community to make the poll more concise which I see as only a good thing for making sure that the community chooses a poll that they truly can get behind.
 

DougJustDoug

Knows the great enthusiasms
is a Site Content Manageris a Top Artistis a Programmeris a Forum Moderatoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnus
Moderator
Conclusion:

We will not accept new submissions for CAP Concepts at the start of a CAP project.
The purpose of the new Concept Workshop is to allow us more time and structure to vet Concepts appropriately before they are used as the basis of a CAP project. So we will not be vetting new Concepts, in the Concept Workshop or elsewhere, when the public participation phase of a new CAP creation project is launched. We may even lock the Concept Workshop for any posts while the Concept is being selected at the start of a new CAP.

Public participation in the CAP project will begin with a Concept Discussion.
The Topic Leader will select several Approved Concepts from the Concept Workshop that are "Under Consideration" for possible inclusion in the slate for the Concept Poll. The purpose of the Concept Discussion is to help the Topic Leader decide on the final slate. The Concept Discussion should be moderated with the following in mind:
  • Only the Concepts listed by the Topic Leader should be discussed in the Concept Discussion. New Concepts are not allowed, nor should people suggest or discuss other Approved Concepts from the Concept Workshop.
  • The Concept Discussion is NOT a voting thread. All posts should make substantive commentary on the Concepts under consideration. Posts that amount to nothing more than "I like/do not like X, Y, and Z concepts" are not allowed.

The Topic Leader will select the final slate of Concepts for the Concept Poll.
Like all CAP steps, the TL should be observant of the intelligent community consensus when making decisions.

The community will vote to determine the winning Concept for each CAP creation project.
No different than the past. This is probably obvious to everyone, but just in case all this talk of "overhauling the Concept process" made anyone think we will not still have a democratic poll -- rest assured, the community WILL ultimately choose the Concept for each project.
 

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

Top