Possible Forum Layout?

I'm ok with Mods and experts having a shared restricted forum. It could be beneficial for "drips, formerly under pressure"... err, I mean ex-spurts... to have some insight into the Moderator's world. This could help prevent conflicts between the two roles.

At this moment I'm leaning towards a title that indicates the expert is someone who "understands and corrals theories and generally keeps the theories organized".

Theory Organizer
Theory Wrestler
Theory Sorter

Something that the EJ forums have slightly gravitated towards, I would like to see not only "here is the theoretical best" but also some "here are some good alternatives, these are the areas that are most flexible".

azarhal wrote:

...
Beside it's a good idea to have forum specific moderators for all sub-forums (or group of sub-forums), as opposed to have generic moderators that need to check all the forums.

That would definitely be how I have envisioned this working. In fact we already have at least one person with localized moderator powers in the current forum (Schwendo).

Aldemarran wrote:

Theory Wrestler

azarhal wrote:

About moderators vs CO experts::
Having sub-forum specific moderators might be the trick here. Basically, moderators that can only moderate a specific sub-forum, elsewhere they are just normal posters.

Beside it's a good idea to have forum specific moderators for all sub-forums (or group of sub-forums), as opposed to have generic moderators that need to check all the forums.

That is true, I think both Ald and me were following that train of thought.

Aldemarran wrote:

Something that the EJ forums have slightly gravitated towards, I would like to see not only "here is the theoretical best" but also some "here are some good alternatives, these are the areas that are most flexible".

Which of the two have they gravitated towards? I agree #2 is the way to go, which I have have seen happen in the EJ forums back when I was playing in form of "Fire and Ice are the two most serviceable ways to play the mage, but Arcane has definite benefits too." (of course this is not what everyone was saying, there were also some "elitists" who disregarded Arcane as an alternative)
It's not all about maximizing damage or maximizing heal, sometimes other traits or special skills can make a build interesting or also, especially for TOR I'd suppose, the perspective to be a hybrid. Therefore we have to be sure the experts are not too close-minded. It is okay to have your favorite way of playing something, but we need these people to be open-minded about the other ways too and approach them objectively rather than biased.


I also like your current approach for the name. Organizer is already a good direction I feel.
Other things that I can think of... go raw with "Theorist" or "Methodist".
Others are "Theory Coordinator", "Theory Overseer".
We could also go another way by assigning animal names as a way of explaining the position. "Theory Caterpillar" (jk ), "Theory Owl", "Theory Cricket".
:O

One way they've changed is to sticky a topic for each spec, even if the spec is "not optimal". Another driving factor towards them gravitating towards #2 is the nature of Major Glyphs not being directly useful and mostly a matter of preference.

Where I would like to see us improve on this is in providing a bit of reference as to "talent points" (or whatever they are called in SW:TOR) that are best for use in deviation. For example: "the three points spent in X have the least impact on your tanking. If you particularly want some other talent X is the best place to start stealing points. If you need more, Y should follow after that. Whatever you steal from, Z is the most important to keep." Just a little more acknowledgement that while a given setup may be "optimal" there are plenty of specs that are "plenty good enough". And making these additional specs more accessible to people can get people going instead of isolating them because they don't like "optimal" for whatever reason.

New website and forums are really coming together. Should be ready for primetime in the next few days.

Ald, your layout ideas were amazing and look great in person. Wait till you guys see what I have in store

Hey now, don't give me too big of an ego rush. I wouldn't want my head to explode and ruin my good looks!

That would be quite useful (concerning 3 posts back). Plus, it doesn't really seem to be too much work to line this up somehow. We'll have to put this all in the guidelines for - oh yeah, so what do we call them? - our experts. (I liked "Theorist")

- be objective and open to all specs, at least when you represent them in the forums.

We'll want these things covered, as of now:
- - talent point distribution in detail (crucial and not so crucial talents)
- - Q&A (can be responded by anyone of course)
- - FAQ


What would we call these guys now? I'm all for "Theory Jerk" (that would be pretty cool). Or you know, "Theory Geek". Maybe it doesn't have to be serious?


Here the first layer order again, updated.

Welcome
General Game Disc
Char Optimization
Server Events
Trade
Guilds
RP/Lore
General Disc
Rigger's

After this there's some left still. Server Events, Guilds, RP Forums all need some guidance. But let's take it one step at a time.

Every time I read theorist, I spell it terrorist.


What about Evangelists (people that preach...)

Grome wrote:

After this there's some left still. Server Events, Guilds, RP Forums all need some guidance. But let's take it one step at a time.

What kind of guidance are you looking for in Guilds and RP? I felt I was deliberately leaving them wide open for purposes of creativity.

azarhal wrote:

...
Every time I read theorist, I spell it terrorist.

...

Oh yeah, I can just hear Powerman 5000 blaring it out now!

"...Break down this is it
Rockin like a theorist
Strapped with a flag and a gun..."

On second thought maybe you just make me think the weirdest thoughts.

With regard to titles for theory leaders, my only concern with non-serious names is that newcomers and people who don't spend time here won't know what these titles or may even misunderstand them.

Is there common slang about "theory leader"?

I used Evangelist, because that's used in software engineering for people who will preach way of doing things.

What about "Theory Honcho"?

I'm just throwing ideas.

azarhal wrote:

Is there common slang about "theory leader"?

Yes, "Elitist". (JK! )

azarhal wrote:

I used Evangelist, because that's used in software engineering for people who will preach way of doing things.

I understand the point, but that would be exactly what I want these people to avoid doing. I want them (and myself) to stick to providing useful information while not only allowing, but appreciating that "perfect" isn't even "necessary".

azarhal wrote:

What about "Theory Honcho"?

I'm just throwing ideas.

Yep, we are all still throwing up (or out, whatever you prefer ) ideas at this stage!

Guilds:
There's probably two extreme ways of making this. Either you let them have complete freedom and write whatever they want. Or you give them a form they have to stick to.
I think we don't need to restrict them as much as the latter but I'd like to see a form filled out at the beginning of the guild's (and maybe the one looking for a guild) advertising post, to include all important information - without having to go trough a lot of text.
That's pretty much the extent of what I was thinking about here.

RP:
That's not really my place to talk about it, but some "rules" might need to be put in place. In the end, I personally don't want to decide anything here, maybe turn to the RP forum visitors again for this one.

-

"Theory Leader" itself is okay. What about "Theory Detective" or "Theory Inspector".

Grome wrote:

RP:
That's not really my place to talk about it, but some "rules" might need to be put in place. In the end, I personally don't want to decide anything here, maybe turn to the RP forum visitors again for this one.

New thread created and cross-linked into the Cantina. (I don't want to do the discussion in the Cantina, that doesn't seem appropriate to the forum, but I would like those who go there to know about it.)

Grome wrote:

Guilds:
There's probably two extreme ways of making this. Either you let them have complete freedom and write whatever they want. Or you give them a form they have to stick to.
I think we don't need to restrict them as much as the latter but I'd like to see a form filled out at the beginning of the guild's (and maybe the one looking for a guild) advertising post, to include all important information - without having to go trough a lot of text.
That's pretty much the extent of what I was thinking about here.

I would refine your two options a touch:

1. Freedom: Would giving them instructions to create a thread for their guild with the first post containing the guild advertisement (and retaining the various suggestions already there) be sufficient? I believe it would generate an up-front post with whatever basics they felt important (which would tell potential recruits something about them) and still provide maximum freedom.
   
2. Form: Use a form to auto-generate a thread with the first post, then encourage them to write their own advertisement in the second post. Possibly have the form pre-create a blank second post under the name of the guild recruiter specified in the form for them to use? Maybe make the second post auto-creation optional? This would really tighten up a quick read description and could auto-implement a series of post title tags (see below) but still leave room for them to be creative in the second post.

Suggested Addition:
There should be some post title tags to help potential recruits sort through the forums without necessarily clicking on every post. Something like "Server [Guild Type] Faction: Guild Name"?

Guild Type tags would be something like: [PvE] [PvP] [RP] [PvE&RP] [PvE&PvP] [PvP&RP] [ALL]

And just to give Arzon even more of a headache, any forum should have the option to list a Sith guild name and a Republic guild name. If both are listed, they should be cross-linked automaticallly...

Theory Doctor?

Now Theory Doctor I kinda like!

Aldemarran wrote:

I would refine your two options a touch:

1. Freedom: Would giving them instructions to create a thread for their guild with the first post containing the guild advertisement (and retaining the various suggestions already there) be sufficient? I believe it would generate an up-front post with whatever basics they felt important (which would tell potential recruits something about them) and still provide maximum freedom.
   
2. Form: Use a form to auto-generate a thread with the first post, then encourage them to write their own advertisement in the second post. Possibly have the form pre-create a blank second post under the name of the guild recruiter specified in the form for them to use? Maybe make the second post auto-creation optional? This would really tighten up a quick read description and could auto-implement a series of post title tags (see below) but still leave room for them to be creative in the second post.

Suggested Addition:
There should be some post title tags to help potential recruits sort through the forums without necessarily clicking on every post. Something like "Server [Guild Type] Faction: Guild Name"?

Guild Type tags would be something like: [PvE] [PvP] [RP] [PvE&RP] [PvE&PvP] [PvP&RP] [ALL]

I was laying down only one solution, not two. Therefore I'll explain it again, I think it didn't come across the way it was supposed to.

What I was suggesting is to give guilds all freedom they want in creating their guild thread BUT they have to dedicate the first lines of their post to a form we will decide on (with useful and necessary information about the guild to be accessed faster). I like your suggestion to have a form for the thread title as well.
I really don't think we need anything fancy for this however, what I explained just now should easily do the trick I think?

As for Guilds that are both Republic and Empire - we will have a forum for each faction, so they will just post twice (once in each).

"Theory Specialist".

But it's true, I like "Theory Doctor" too. Something tells me there's gotta be something better but I am fond of the way it kind of takes the "too serious" out of it just a touch.

Plus, it is kinda like the whole Doctor / Patient relationship. The doctor is usually right, but you have to choose for yourself how you'll take the doctor's advice. They can't force you to do anything. In short, they are experts here to help, but not to control.

And we get the amusement value of "I'm a doctor for theories" pro bono...

Did you get my guild forum related point?


edit: So we settle on Theory Doctor for now, huh? Makes good sense with your explanation too, Ald.

edit: oh, and good call making that RP forum thread, thanks!