Ordering Grammer Prose Queues

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have been thinking of ways to get a more organised sequence in which analyses are to be GP'd, and this idea struck me - that the GP order should be prioritized based on the Pokemon's current viability ranking. Why I propose this is that I feel that only official tiers get the relevance in GPing, and Other Metagames analyses have been pushed into obscurity. Why I am basing the priority on viability is that a tier's / OM's most viable Pokemon should, at the very least, have an analysis so as to direct a newcomer to it, which can advice him / her on the benefits and limitations of one spread of one spread over the other. It always happens that the more viable the Pokemon is, the more it's used. The GP queue could be based on usage, but since viability changes are less common than usage changes, I think GP queue based on VR would be more defined, and lead to lesser backlog in any single tier, and instead would be a backlog of Pokemon which won't be needed by people as much as the pertinent ones....

If more than two Pokemon in the same VR rank have GP checks pending, arrange them in order of "First created thread"; if there are two Pokemon whose analyses from the same VR rank have been created on the same date, maybe its usage on the ladder for the month in which its analysis was initiated.

If this would mean more job for the already hands-full GP team, they could have a person or two just to arrange the analysis into the priority brackets, since it would need some time and effort to constantly update that.
 

The Dutch Plumberjack

ace of wands
is a member of the Site Staffis a Top Smogon Social Media Contributoris a Top Contributoris a Top Smogon Media Contributoris an Administrator
C&C & TFP Leader
I don't really want to complicate things like this, it's indeed a lot of extra work / cross-checking, and while it's (naturally) true that often GP members will be quicker to jump on the shorter / easier analyses that also means we've at least got those on-site. There's also the fact that sometimes GPers simply prefer to check for a given meta; e.g. we have a couple members on the team that main UU and also prefer checking UU analyses because it's the meta they're fluent in, and everyone can have their own reasons for gravitating to a certain meta. I'm just happy when my people help getting stuff on-site, I don't want to make them check specific analyses rather than the ones they'd prefer to do when there's no compelling reason why they should.

The order in which analyses get checked usually doesn't matter too much anyway; it's really no big deal at all if two NU C-ranks are completed while an UU B-rank is still stuck in GP, and the only time where it may be a problem is if irrelevant mons are completed while high-priority mons (S-ranks / high A-ranks / mons without analyses in usage-based tiers) are being passed over. Those cases are rare enough though that they can just be pointed out to us individually, which people have been doing, and they don't warrant fundamentally overhauling the way we organise the queue.

Also, just so this has been said; there is a lot of GP work to be done atm, so even if we prioritise high-prio stuff it can still take us some time to get to it, because there are also other important analyses to check out there. We're in the unfortunate position that we have to make do with a given number of contributors that doesn't increase if new sections pop up with new work for us, so sadly sometimes people will have to have some patience with us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Top