Minecraft Middle Earth is a Minecraft community that recreates the world described by JRR Tolkien and his writings. Everyone can participate in organized events in which we collaborate to create major landmarks, terrain, caves, castles, towns, farms and more.
To get started, visit The New Player Guide
Joining the server can be done straight away, but you will have to pass the New Player Quiz. Use the The New Player Guide to get acquainted with our community.
And when they are finished investigating a project, do they report directly to you or a Valar?I'm trying to not let someone who is in charge of let's say building, do audits for building, as with "tunnel vision" you tend not to see things that are more apparent to other people. Thus it will most likely be another entity or person who analyzes that.
And when they are finished investigating a project, do they report directly to you or a Valar?
Wasn't gonna vote at all because I haven't been around long enough to really see a huge change, but I'll vote yes for ya, Smithz.Craaaaaaaaaaaaappp, I misclicked on Nay... Sorry Q
One of the main problems in this project is the fact that decision making takes ages
I volunteer to review the auditor auditor auditor auditor auditor auditor's audits.What happens if this person is inactive or fails to fulfil their role - another audit maybe?
To play devil's advocate somewhat:
You highlighted administrative bureaucracy as getting in the way of the development of projects etc. How do you feel the introduction of further administrative measures would alleviate this?
Who would have to sort through these reports and decide what is worth forwarding to the staff forums?
What happens if this person is inactive or fails to fulfil their role - another audit maybe?
How will decisions be made once they reach the staff forums?
What if the staff forums discussions are split on a key (or any) decision?
Don't get me wrong, it was 'big change' that I was pushing for before eventually giving up and resigning. I'm just not sure that I see how the above proposals directly improve things.
I was summarising/paraphrasing. I feel the point in the question is still valid, regardless of whether you agree with the wording of the premise.I said that the current structure has flaws because the decision making takes place for a long time, or gets hindered because there is no unanimous agreement.
This is quite vague, are you referring internally within the admin/moderator forums, or to discussions like this one also?everything right now is pretty much chaotic decision making and everyone wants their say even on subjects that do not concern them to be frank.
Yeah I got that. The points I made were regarding how those reports would be handled once they're submitted from this external party.I also pointed out that Audits will not be run be the same person each time, and running an audit does not really take a long time. The point is to have a fresh (external) insight of someone, as that usually leads to great discoveries or the way to good ideas. The report the person would make is fairly standard, and everything they found gets published in that report, but that doesn't mean everything in it is utter truth, it is just the opinion of someone externally.
What I was eluding to here, is that having someone write a report - picking out the potential issues - gets you to the same point that someone simply raising it as concern would.
You'd still have to go through the processes of deciding whether it's a valid point, what the potential solutions might be, which of those solutions is the most suitable, and then how to go ahead and implement said solution. It's this latter part that you've said isn't working too well, isn't it?
...that most decisions pass through the Valars that each have their say, and needs the approval of the majority of these. Some decisions even need unanimous approval, and the moment when someone isn't online, or active, or someone doesn't agree, the process of decision taking can take up days, weeks, sometimes a decision is never taken.
What I was eluding to here, is that having someone write a report - picking out the potential issues - gets you to the same point that someone simply raising it as concern would.
You'd still have to go through the processes of deciding whether it's a valid point, what the potential solutions might be, which of those solutions is the most suitable, and then how to go ahead and implement said solution. It's this latter part that you've said isn't working too well, isn't it?.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?