Policy Review Leadership Structure

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
Since it's a formal written proposal, let's replace specific mentions of "DougJustDoug" with the position title "CAP Head Administrator".

Once we get the SOps solidified, my intention is to name one of the SOps as "Head SOp" for the IRC channel. This designation will not confer any specific powers. It is intended along the same general lines as Head Moderator is for the forum. Since the SOps collectively have certain responsibilities, the Head Sop will simply act as the singular voice and coordinator for the SOps when it is appropriate. For example, arranging for discussions of promotions and communicating those decisions to me would be the job of the Head SOp. That's just one example, I'm sure there will be other cases when we need to interact with "the SOps" as a collective team, and the Head SOp would be the liaison for that sort of thing.

Also, I would like to include the stipulation that the CAP Head Moderator and CAP Head SOp cannot be the same person. While I expect overlap between channel Ops and forum Moderators, I want to reinforce the distinction between the two leadership groups and their responsibilities.
 

jas61292

used substitute
is a Community Contributoris a Top CAP Contributoris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
To go along with what Doug said, since it is a formal proposal, it might be a good idea to specify in the first section that the position of QOp is reserved for the CAP head administrator. This is probably not that important, but I just thought I'd mention it for the sake of thoroughness.
 

Stratos

Banned deucer.
OK, so I'm putting all of the snippets of proposal i've dropped throughout the thread, with everyone's suggestions, into one big compilation in the post with the original proposal. Feedback appreciated, as always.

And as regards to Doug's Head SOp idea;

honestly, i'm not sure if I like this. On the forums, Head Mod makes sense because it's often hard to get in contact with people, and it's nice to hear one person's word and assume they speak for the group. But on IRC, it's a lot more fluid; the whole point is that you can speak with a bunch of people at once. I don't see a formal liaison as anything necessary with #cap.
 
I didn't want to bring this up at first because it's somewhat irrelevant, but I feel that this concern should at least be raised in a forum post. Right now the owner of #cap is not active in CAP. Now I've been told that he probably doesn't care anymore, and I mostly believe that, but nonetheless I think it's a serious enough potential security threat that it should at least be mentioned. People say they're not going to do things, but the world would be very different if that always came to be, wouldn't it?

Other than that, I get the sense that most people, like myself, just want to get a semi-formalized process going and are not interested in the little details. Maybe I'm being biased because of the above, but I'm just calling it like I see it. As long as SOps can make reasonable access level changes without running into major disputes, things should be fine.
 

Birkal

We have the technology.
is a Top Artistis a Top CAP Contributoris a Top Smogon Media Contributoris a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Other than that, I get the sense that most people, like myself, just want to get a semi-formalized process going and are not interested in the little details. Maybe I'm being biased because of the above, but I'm just calling it like I see it. As long as SOps can make reasonable access level changes without running into major disputes, things should be fine.
This about sums up the conclusion to this thread. We'll leave the minute details of #cap leadership for the SOps to decide. Likewise, we'll allow the Analysis Coordinator to deal with how they wish to set up the process in terms of QC, GP checks, and article approvals. This isn't something that we ultimately need to decide as a PRC, so let's leave it in the hands of those who are capable.

As a result of this Policy Review thread, we will institute both an Analysis Coordinator and a Head SOp. These positions will be held by experienced CAP members who are both actively participating in their field and looking to improve their specific area. One do not need to be a forum moderator to fill one of these positions, although it is possible for a forum moderator to hold one of these positions. The CAP Head Administrator and the Head Moderator cannot hold either of these two positions. These two users will ultimately decide on what their position entails, as well as strategies on how to run their respective area fluidly. Once they've developed the responsibilities of their position, we'll collaborate to write that information down and host it on site.

Furthermore, future positions of leadership can be created in the future if the need arises. This PR thread was useful in that it allowed us to design two new positions to help CAP run more functionally. If you as a PR member ever see the need for another leadership position, feel free to discuss it with the CAP Head Administrator or any of the CAP leadership positions. We'll discuss the viability of the position internally and return to you with a response. This shouldn't need to happen often, but this rule will allow us to create new positions when the need presents itself with little effort.


The Head CAP Administrator (DougJustDoug) and the Head Moderator (myself) have discussed various candidates to fill these two positions. We've decided on two specific members to fill these roles of CAP Leadership. However, for the sake of thoroughness, I will leave this thread open for discussion for roughly another two days. If you have some crucial insight to add on any of the above enactments, please post them within that time slot. If not, then we'll announce the two promotions publicly after 48 hours of this post.
 

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

Top