AVID:Requests for Comment/Make new positions for both the wiki and other AVID projects and add interim members while implement breaks within certain positions

The following discussion is closed.
Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Closing as

Retracted. Eternity Media Group (talk) 10:13, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Membership and positions (revised RfC)

(this is a revised draft based on raidarr's comment)

i've been thinking that although in the past year we made numerous progressions that helped the wiki's growth and perception among many, this year also had some incidents, especially within the discord server, that either severely impacted some members' mental health (especially within some of the overlapping branches) to the point that some had to step down briefly or demoralized by the state of the wiki/server in spite of said progressions, either in part because of the friend of a friend hiring that, thankfully, is being addressed atm, their aggressive see-saw swing of either being too serious or not being serious enough, especially that there is a ballance that comes of being a member of an overlapping branch of a logo wiki, or drama that is beyond their control, and although some of the issues i'll bring up may not be the main causes, i'll argue that these, in some form, contributed to some of the discontent within the server or site, i would like to propose two ideas.

1. either expand the number of positions for graphic design for avid, the avid youtube channel, avid social media, and future avid projects in a small amount or have some kind of master list of staff inclusive of some avid projects, including some that have been already created, and some additional lists for people who contributed in some form so it (in terms of the former) wouldn't have to confine into a small number of members within the upper branches of the brand and spreading them too thin since i feel like some expanding themselves beyond the upper branch didn't help much matters, especially within their mental health, or in case of the latter, also being more organized or both depending on the options while also in case some either resign or get demoted there will be always a palace for members in some form or another and although it's good that there is a small team or department that handles some of the weight on handling some of the projects, i feel like if there is a rapid expansion, especially for a wiki that has a name that was coined barely a year ago, i feel like at least there should be some drastic (but not immediate) changes since if unchecked in a small amount of people or still kept into an unorganized state, it can be snowballed into fatigue, worsening performances, and/or inflaming mental health issues between some within the branches.

2. put an interim election because in case some leave for reasons like mental health, circumstances beyond their control, or just waning interest, an interim election could choose the best people to be trusted in stepping up in place for a briefly departed member while steadying the ship when they're gone, also maybe we could have volunteers to either collaborate with some staff groups in the wake of this rapid expansion in projects ala graphic design so it can help both keep the massive weight and pressure off of some while showing some members their worth to staff.

but those are some of my ideas, thanks for reading. Mr. Gann (talk) 06:55, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Support

Support For Part 1 of the proposal. Having staff managing all aspects of AVID has significantly impacted our ability to function as a team. Eternity Media Group (talk) 07:25, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Support · Talk · Edits 07:38, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Abstain

Abstain for part 2 of this proposal. I'm not sure that break periods can be properly enforced yet. I suspect that if implemented, it would become something we get used to over time, however, hence not an all out oppose. updating to a general abstain having read raidarr's comments. Eternity Media Group (talk) 07:25, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Abstain after reading Radiarr's comments, originally Support. · Talk · Edits 04:47, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

Just food for thought and not a full vote. I'm not sure you quite see how the staffing structure works as it is not necessarily bureaucrats, admins, mods, and staff: this is a simplification you see on the discord server. Rather it is a set of three (at this time) overlapping branches: wiki staff, forum staff and discord staff, forum naturally being the newest and the members of each group often overlapping. There is also already what you'd call a team or department, a handful of users who've taken responsibility for the youtube channel. All management unifies at the bureaucrat level who oversee everything and in the background are tech faces like myself who also assist in multiple branches.

This arrangement can and probably should be improved, this is something to consider, but I'm not sure it's ready to add multiple full-on staff positions as suggested here at this time. Instead the current arrangement should be optimized and done better, then grow organically. It is really a lack of professionalism, consistent standards and having process to deal with situations that has resulted in the incidents you describe. Load balancing has been a problem as well and the fact that the top management is distributed across three senior staff members helps with that. What is left is making management more organized.

What would be an interesting start is to have a 'master list' of staff inclusive of all three platforms then additionally lists for people who've volunteered in specific capacities. This helps organize a bit more, allows some of the original suggestion to take place but I don't think it would add unnecessary formality. People like Nancer could be recognized for their graphics contributions there and the current organizers of the youtube channel could be listed. It would also clear up what I believe is a misconception that took place in the original proposal.

Breaks are, as stated above, not really enforcable nor practical at the current staff team's size. At best we can encourage people to at least chip in a little every so often and if they chip in a lot, to pace themselves and remember they're not alone. Smaller steps first and time will tell if they're needed or need to go further.

Interim staff is briefly mentioned but granted no detail. This is an interesting part, I'd like to figure some ways to help onboard volunteers. What I'd suggest is an arrangement where people volunteer to collaborate with staff groups, ie, your suggested graphics roles or with the channel, and that gives a powerful foot in the door for people to help demonstrate their potential. Or it can be a way to just help out without raising the stakes. Up to the individual.

In so many words I think a lot of this is on the right track but the wider proposal is starting a little too much too soon. Bits and pieces should be considered and integrated and we work from there. First priority for me is making the staff more coherent so it can afford to do some of this extra. There's a lot of room to discuss bits and pieces in a more casual venue such as the forum or suggestions channel on the discord for refinement.

This is probably grounds to oppose and I may think on it more and leave a proper vote, but these are my thoughts.--Raidarr (talk) 12:21, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

i would like to request to retract my post. Mr. Gann (talk) 10:11, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive.
Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.