nightblitz42
Moderator
Discuss your thoughts on mod transparency here. Keep it civil.
Guidelines:
History (Grossly oversimplified):
For much of BBP's history, different facets of BBP were overseen by "Committees." In many cases, Committees would publicly discuss potential changes within Smogon threads, then vote on a course of action.
At one point, BBP hit an extended and unprecedented slump in activity. The number of active players was in the single-digits and I recall threads from a year ago or longer persisting on the front page of BBP. Because of the total lack of player activity, committees ceased to be operational. JJayyFeather took the helm and wound up proposing and enacting many core game changes with varying amounts of feedback from other players. At the time, there certainly were complaints about this method of administration, but it was accepted because realistically it was the only way important changes were going to get done. And get done, stuff certainly did (not only by JjayyFeather, but by other players as well). Due to everyone's hard work, as well as some fortunate changes in circumstance, the situation for BBP slowly improved.
As updates and QoL changes lured back old players, and increased forum visibility attracted new players, administrative policies largely remained unchanged. Granted, huge game changes (such as the fiercely-controversial introduction of the JC system) were discussed informally among all players within Discord. However, many smaller system and balance-related changes were only discussed between a Moderator team of 3-4 players before being implemented.
Some players who lacked access to Discord complained about not being able to participate in discussions, so we added various feedback and discussion threads to the Policy Center. Although players eagerly provided their valuable opinions in these discussion threads, the discussions themselves often did not lead to real action before they fizzled out. After which, the topics would get picked up by moderators in private discussion months later before the moderators enacted a course of action themselves. The most glaring example of this would be Signature Z-Crystal rebalancing, which was discussed on-and-off for a very long time with no outcome until the Moderator Team suddenly implemented the Gen 8.3 update. Surprisingly, the Gen 8.3 update included a change that seemed to run against the flow of the public discussion: the embracing of double Z-Move use, which was previously agreed to be an overpowered effect.
Of course, the most controversial aspect of the Gen 8.3 update was its drastic change to Combinations, a long-standing core mechanic of BBP. Although general feedback to the change was positive, many players expressed frustration at a lack of transparency because the change was not discussed outside of the Moderator channel ahead of time. Which brings us here.
Discussion Topics:
Guidelines:
- Refrain from making personal attacks against any individual.
- Each post should offer something new to the discussion. If you agree with all the points somebody made, then simply Like their post.
- Offer only sincere suggestions (no hyperbole or satire).
History (Grossly oversimplified):
For much of BBP's history, different facets of BBP were overseen by "Committees." In many cases, Committees would publicly discuss potential changes within Smogon threads, then vote on a course of action.
At one point, BBP hit an extended and unprecedented slump in activity. The number of active players was in the single-digits and I recall threads from a year ago or longer persisting on the front page of BBP. Because of the total lack of player activity, committees ceased to be operational. JJayyFeather took the helm and wound up proposing and enacting many core game changes with varying amounts of feedback from other players. At the time, there certainly were complaints about this method of administration, but it was accepted because realistically it was the only way important changes were going to get done. And get done, stuff certainly did (not only by JjayyFeather, but by other players as well). Due to everyone's hard work, as well as some fortunate changes in circumstance, the situation for BBP slowly improved.
As updates and QoL changes lured back old players, and increased forum visibility attracted new players, administrative policies largely remained unchanged. Granted, huge game changes (such as the fiercely-controversial introduction of the JC system) were discussed informally among all players within Discord. However, many smaller system and balance-related changes were only discussed between a Moderator team of 3-4 players before being implemented.
Some players who lacked access to Discord complained about not being able to participate in discussions, so we added various feedback and discussion threads to the Policy Center. Although players eagerly provided their valuable opinions in these discussion threads, the discussions themselves often did not lead to real action before they fizzled out. After which, the topics would get picked up by moderators in private discussion months later before the moderators enacted a course of action themselves. The most glaring example of this would be Signature Z-Crystal rebalancing, which was discussed on-and-off for a very long time with no outcome until the Moderator Team suddenly implemented the Gen 8.3 update. Surprisingly, the Gen 8.3 update included a change that seemed to run against the flow of the public discussion: the embracing of double Z-Move use, which was previously agreed to be an overpowered effect.
Of course, the most controversial aspect of the Gen 8.3 update was its drastic change to Combinations, a long-standing core mechanic of BBP. Although general feedback to the change was positive, many players expressed frustration at a lack of transparency because the change was not discussed outside of the Moderator channel ahead of time. Which brings us here.
Discussion Topics:
- In your opinion: what differences are there between a change that can get pushed immediately by mods with little/no feedback, and a change that necessitates wide and open discussion?
- What measurable guidelines would you like Moderators to follow (with regards to transparency) when preparing to potentially enact changes?
- When a moderator has an idea for a change, how soon should it be brought to public attention?
- Are you yourself satisfied with your ability to propose new changes? If not, what concrete changes would you like made to the system?
- After public discussion takes place, how should a final decision be reached?