Discussion on Proposals
Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 4:30 am
This thread is for discussion on proposals presented in viewtopic.php?f=1&p=591080.
A forum for discussion about the PBBRPG Cantr II
https://forum.cantr.org:443/
Joshuamonkey wrote:Decisions changing how decisions are made - GAB and GAC
Decisions changing game rules and significant policies - GAB
Decisions that are likely to have strong opposition (even by a few players) - GAB
Staff OrganizationResources
- Decisions involving existence of a department. - GAB
- Decisions regarding the scope or responsibilities of a department. - GAB
Programming
- Decisions that affect what players and characters have built up previously (basically the same thing as a decision likely to have opposition). - GAB
- Decisions that require programming changes should be approved by the Programming Chair or department.
Players
- Decisions that affect PD processes should be approved by the PD Chair.
- Decisions that affect the mechanics of the game should be approved by the RD Chair.
- Decisions that affect marketing tools and the look of the front page should be approved by the Marketing Chair.
Communications
- Bannings and account lockings of more than 3 days. - GAB
- Policies for what is allowed or punished and what not (game rules). - GAB
Languages
- Decisions to announce mechanics of the game should be approved by the RD Chair.
- Decisions to provide rule clarifications should be approved by the PD Chair.
Marketing
- Change of language of the rules and official terms or policies on cantr.net or the Webzine should be approved the same way that changes to these are approved. However, the Languages Chair oversees appropriate translations.
- Decisions to mention mechanics of the game publicly should be approved by the RD Chair.
Wolfsong wrote:First, why is a criteria of joining the player's board staff activity? If they are a member of staff, they are no longer a player and no longer have a player perspective.
Active work in Cantr staff
Work in Cantr staff is no less important than other types of contributions, and we want staff to have an opportunity to participate in or give feedback on all public (or significant) staff decisions, even those outside their department. Staff activity is recorded on a triweekly basis. See Proposal 2 - Staff Activity for more information. To ensure that the player board is not simply a staff board, staff activity or position does not award the position of councilor. Furthermore, we encourage staff to share Cantr as well for the opportunity to be a councilor on the player board.
Wolfsong wrote:Also, I would advise caution re: donations that allow board membership. While a good way to cover any money problems, it turns players into shareholders, and shareholders will want much more control over the direction of the game than a player with no material investment would. (Can be a good thing, or a bad thing, depending on relative values. It means staff will have to consider financial loss or gain when implementing features.)
Wolfsong wrote:Also, what does the Volunteer Agreement look like? When will a copy be posted publicly?
Wolfsong wrote:In terms of the mechanics of donation, I would advocate (from an owner's perspective) using Patreon. Recurring donators can be part of this player board, and because of the ease of autorenewing a subscription, Cantr will probably get forgetful patrons contributing more than they would have otherwise. Plus, it feels more legitimate and secure than the direct through PayPal link.
I may retain access to material I created or worked on myself when I am no longer a member of Cantr staff.
Any material that I create and provide to Cantr staff (including code, ideas, documentation) will become the property of Cantr.
Wolfsong wrote:couldn't a disgruntled staff member demand their code be pulled from the game? Or have I read it wrong?