A Commitment to Community

[Jonathan Meer]

I don't like to write when no one reads it; I expect the rest of you are the same way. I propose this:

Keep the algorithm logging word count and its effect on XP and CA, if we must. Cut it down to 10%. The other 90% should be made up through rewards suggested by the site according to the story itself. These rewards will be discussed after a thread is completed, and declared to be so by the author(s). The discussion will occur in a dedicated topic in a particular sub-forum (titled 'Review,' or some such), which is accessible to everyone with a post count greater than 5.

In these topics, the members discuss the thread as a whole, with an emphasis upon plot, style, etc. The same criteria by which you judge a book as good or otherwise would be applied here; this would be akin to the reviews that are sometimes requested in the RPG Discussion (after all, if you're reading it, why not provide some constructive criticism, or praise?). Accompanying these analyses would be a suggestion for a proper reward, which should both correspond to the plot of the roleplay (such that the assault upon a squad of warriors might result in a valuable combat item left behind), as well as to the strength of the roleplay itself. This 'strength' can be assessed in terms of absolute prowess, or in terms of improvement. If, for example, it becomes clear to the community that a particular writer is working hard to improve herself, and that work shows in the writing, then that may be grounds for proposing a greater reward than the 'absolute prowess' might otherwise indicate.

A person may either propose a reward, or 'second' another person's proposal. If a proposal receives X seconds, it is ratified (pending Staff approval). The number specified by 'X' may need to change as time goes on, depending upon how active the sub-forum is. Considering the current level of activity on Chubbs, I suspect 4 seconds is currently enough to consider a proposal ratified and closed out. If, however, there is a split, and more than one proposal receives two seconds, then a poll is created and left open for two days, at which point the proposal with the most votes is ratified. If it is a tie, a Staff member tie-breaks.

The member whose thread is under review may make a proposal on his/her own topic, but may not second another person's proposal. That member may not vote if the proposals go to a poll.

Staff must confirm all ratifications before they are put into place. This is solely to keep the procedure from being abused. If a reward is deemed to be not just slightly, but excessively above or below what a particular thread calls for, the Staff member may submit the proposals for Staff review.

I suspect the 'criticism' aspect of this system would encourage (active) people to participate; after all, if you bother to provide criticism for a person, it seems likely that that person will bother to provide criticism for you.

This system would require a lot of all of us, particularly Staff. This might be a good reason to re-institute the 'Story Mod' position.

I want this to work, and I think well enough of the Chubbs community to think that it would.

There is pessimism as to whether or not it would. It requires investment, and a setting aside of pure self-interest. But this investment would feed the community.

This system will fail if others do not participate.

Prove that Chubbs is not merely selfishness. Commit, here, to participation in every single thread (not most, not 90%, every) for the first three months of the potential implementation of this system.

Committing does not indicate that you agree with the system as described above; it may need tweaks. Committing does, however, indicate that you resonate with the spirit of the system above; that Chubbs is not a set of isolated members, but a vigorous writing community where each has an interest in the others.

I'll start:

I hereby commit to participation in every single review thread and process in this system for the first three months of its potential implementation (with significant contributions thereafter).

Signatories (13): Alex Trafford, Jayd, Celena, John Doe, Jon Meer, Juno, Kaden, Mr. Zhu, Rem-13, Rose, Siegfried Hunin, Tamsin, Vad

[Kaden]

Like I said -- in response to that post, no less -- I may not think it will work, but I'm always willing to give people the chance to surprise.

Of course, I absolutely can't expect people to do something I'm not willing to do myself.

I hereby commit to participation in every single review thread and process in this system for the first three months of its potential implementation (with significant contributions thereafter).

[Jesper]

I hereby commit to participation in every single review thread and process in this system for the first three months of its potential implementation (with significant contributions thereafter).

This is something I can do, but like everything in which I endeavor, I'll be damned if I'm the only one participating.

[Jonathan Meer]

The two signatures above your's indicate that you won't be the only one.

[Vad]

I hereby commit to participation in every single review thread and process in this system for the first three months of its potential implementation (with significant contributions thereafter).

I'll be damned if this place dies. ;.;

[Mr. Zhu]

I hereby commit to participation in every single review thread and process in this sytem for the first three months of its implementation.

I guess at this time of need for Chubbs, I can give up a mere three months to what Chubbs has given me in return.

[Rem-13]

I hereby commit, no stop laughing I'm serious, I hereby commit to participation in every single review thread and process in this sytem for the first three months of its implementation.

Even I don't write much anymore I still read alot of what goes on.

[Alexander Trafford]

Yes, I'll do it too.

[Sigfried Hunin]

Mehhh. I'd totally be willing to review everything, regardless of the system implemented.

[Super Buu]

I hereby commit to participation in every single review thread and process in this system for the first three months of its potential implementation (with significant contributions thereafter).

[John Doe]

I hereby commit, no stop laughing I'm serious, I hereby commit to participation in every single review thread and process in this sytem for the first three months of its implementation.

I always wanted a reason to start reading people's stuff again, and saving the REC- er, saving Chubbs seems like a pretty good one.

[Rebekah]

THE BLACK HOOD COMMITS!


xD

[Celena]

I've been here far too long just to let this rpg continue its crash course. I commit too.

[Tamsin]

I hereby commit to participation in every single review thread and process in this system for the first three months of its potential implementation (with significant contributions thereafter).

By the way, if possible, it would be nice if the system somehow encouraged the use of the forum rating system. Right now, the ratings go almost entirely unused and it would be useful to have RP threads rated based on quality for easier browsing.

[Juno]

I hereby commit to participation in every single review thread and process in this system for the first three months of its potential implementation (with significant contributions thereafter).

[Sigfried Hunin]

I understand a lot of people aren't active right now and can't really C&C on stuff, so that's cool or whatever.

But to all the people that signed this and have been on the site, but didn't so C&C for the quests, I have only this to say to you:

[Piper Juunanagou]

=(

[John Doe]

Damnit, I stuck true to my word, and damnit I'm going to stick to them!

SAVE THE CHUBBS! SAVE THE WORLD!

[Jonathan Meer]

Hopefully, it's because people were busy.

I didn't expect everyone to actually follow through on this, but I did hope for more than four.

Still, four is not bad for the first go-around.

[Alexander Trafford]

I'm trying, once my law school application cycle is finished, I'll be more active, for awhile at least.