|
The strict answer is that it is up to your Regional Venture Coordinator. They have a lot of latitude in how it's implemented.
You appear to be in the Southeast region under Delbert Collins II. However, I would suggest starting with your immediate Venture Lieutenant. I don't know North Carolina geography well enough to identify who that is.
The list of Venture Officers is here.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While I normally applaud flexibility in allowing local control over as much as possible, in talking to others in person and on-line, it sounds like regional decisions are creating significant differences in the application of the RSP that seriously affect player engagement and enjoyment. For example, one person told me that their local organized play leadership decided that the program was not worth implementing at all, due to issues with their local VC and RVC (I suggested escalating up the chain); in different threads on the forums here I have seen some participants post that once their RSP application was approved, their RVC allowed retroactive GM credit back to the official program launch date, but my RVC said that no retroactive credits were allowed (which has less impact if only one RSP GM boon is allowed per year); it took four weeks to approve my RSP application, but other regions had the program in place within a week of launch. I like the program a lot, especially since the number of events that qualify for convention support in my area have decreased drastically over the last couple of years, but I think more consistent application of rules over all regions would be a better thing.
In regard to what Tonya said, Jesse, was that in a source I can find on-line or was that in a direct communication? Thank you.
|
For example, one person told me that their local organized play leadership decided that the program was not worth implementing at all, due to issues with their local VC and RVC (I suggested escalating up the chain)
My VC has told me that "he doesn't have time for that because of <upcoming conventions>". That was months ago. I recently had another player/gm tell me that he was driving elsewhere to GM just so he could get the boon. I would love to be able to play Skinwalker 'cause they're one of my favorite races (and now that I put that into words, my VC knows that because he once jokingly offered me his skinwalker boon for me to play <that broken character> again).
|
...one person told me that their local organized play leadership decided that the program was not worth implementing at all, due to issues with their local VC and RVC
I hear things like this from time to time and I do not understand why people are resistant to escalating the issue to Tonya. Going to the forums and complaining does absolutely nothing to fix those types of issues. In most cases, it just creates more problems.
Use the chain of command to resolve your issues. VA→VL→VC→RVC→OPC
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hear things like this from time to time and I do not understand why people are resistant to escalating the issue to Tonya. Going to the forums and complaining does absolutely nothing to fix those types of issues. In most cases, it just creates more problems.Use the chain of command to resolve your issues. VA→VL→VC→RVC→OPC
Bob,
The problem with escalation is this:
If a player is in a given area and they do not feel they are getting proper support/mistreated/etc by the local Vs, and they try to escalate it, then the Vs are going to ask the subordinate Vs if it's a thing.
If it really IS an issue, the subordinate Vs are not going to address it, because they either don't see it or don't want to see it.
This then turns the whole chain into this issue of 'well, I didn't get a result here from 'Mommy', so let's go ask 'Daddy'.... oh, 'Daddy' sided with 'Mommy' so let's go to 'Grandma' and see what she thinks, etc.
Meanwhile, while this is all going on, players that are playing locally STILL have to deal with the subordinate Vs, who will start to find out that they have had someone go 'over their heads'.
This could result (depending on how bad the situation is) in restrictions in play/GM ability, lack of contact/support/information from the subordinate Vs, etc.
And the further up the chain one goes, the greater the pressure magnifies, so no one WANTS to start the fecal typhoon that will erupt by contacting the OPC.
...because no one is perfect, and we want to protect those who volunteer their time if possible.
Venture-Agent, Nebraska—Omaha
|
The problem with escalation is this:
If a player is in a given area and they do not feel they are getting proper support/mistreated/etc by the local Vs, and they try to escalate it, then the Vs are going to ask the subordinate Vs if it's a thing.
If it really IS an issue, the subordinate Vs are not going to address it, because they either don't see it or don't want to see it.
This is why you document issues, as well as your attempts to follow the chain. It's much easier to address any issue if there is evidence and a reasonable request.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem with escalation is...
Well, I can tell you that as an RVC, if you have a problem and chose not to escalate it to me, then I've got nothin'. I can't fix what I don't know is broken. I've always said that if a "problem" is not bad enough for someone to escalate it to the people who can "fix" it, then its not really a problem.
|
|
The problem with escalation is...Well, I can tell you that as an RVC, if you have a problem and chose not to escalate it to me, then I've got nothin'. I can't fix what I don't know is broken. I've always said that if a "problem" is not bad enough for someone to escalate it to the people who can "fix" it, then its not really a problem.
See above comment about fecal typhoon.
It may be a small matter for someone to say "Hey, I never seem to get chronicles when I play under this GM, or at events this V* runs", IF they know who to contact and have confidence in the system. Not everyone follows the site, not everyone has a smart phone, not everyone has the time to do this...
However, if it turns out that V* has been doing this consistently, then there will be many players who either don't realize that it's an issue, or who don't want to raise a stink because 'at least V* is trying to get something going, and I don't have the time to step up and fill those shoes if they quit/get fired'.
I have *no doubt* in my mind that RVCs take decisive and respectful action in a timely fashion, and this is not an indictment of any RVC or even any V*.
However, there is always bureaucratic inertia and folks will not raise concerns if it seems the party is successful on the mission by their being quiet about pertinent concerns.
In addtion, the OPC and team have been swamped enough that last year's Guide was -- to put it mildly -- containing of a few errors. Trying to raise concerns to folks who appear *on the surface* to already be 'behind on their work' doesn't seem like a cool thing to do.
|
Regional Venture-Coordinator, Baltic
|
In addtion, the OPC and team have been swamped enough that last year's Guide was -- to put it mildly -- containing of a few errors. Trying to raise concerns to folks who appear *on the surface* to already be 'behind on their work' doesn't seem like a cool thing to do.
RVCs are not responsible for the guide, so that argument doesn't fly.
|
|
In addtion, the OPC and team have been swamped enough that last year's Guide was -- to put it mildly -- containing of a few errors. Trying to raise concerns to folks who appear *on the surface* to already be 'behind on their work' doesn't seem like a cool thing to do.RVCs are not responsible for the guide, so that argument doesn't fly.
Until you typed that, I did not know. Thank you for the education this morning.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In addtion, the OPC and team have been swamped enough that last year's Guide was -- to put it mildly -- containing of a few errors. Trying to raise concerns to folks who appear *on the surface* to already be 'behind on their work' doesn't seem like a cool thing to do.RVCs are not responsible for the guide, so that argument doesn't fly.
He was saying Tonya is super busy and he doesn't want to bother her with stuff. Tonya is not an RVC.
|
Regional Venture-Coordinator, Baltic
|
He was saying Tonya is super busy and he doesn't want to bother her with stuff. Tonya is not an RVC.In addtion, the OPC and team have been swamped enough that last year's Guide was -- to put it mildly -- containing of a few errors. Trying to raise concerns to folks who appear *on the surface* to already be 'behind on their work' doesn't seem like a cool thing to do.RVCs are not responsible for the guide, so that argument doesn't fly.
Hence the existance of the RVCs and the chain of command. The RVCs help to mediate lesser disputes, so the OPC can do campaign stuff. Only when a dispute is with a RVC, or an issue is so major that the RVC deems it nessecary to get Tonya involved as well she won't be distracted from her other tasks.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think Wei Ji's point is that the average player isn't deep enough into the details to know that. For many people, they just see that management is so busy that they never got around to fixing the season 8 guide that had serious problems, so what are the odds of newer complaints being dealt with?
I'm not saying I agree with that perspective, but it's worth noting that this way of thinking, combined with a "don't rock the boat" attitude towards going over local management's head, could cause the average player/GM to not bother complaining about stuff.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...one person told me that their local organized play leadership decided that the program was not worth implementing at all, due to issues with their local VC and RVCI hear things like this from time to time and I do not understand why people are resistant to escalating the issue to Tonya. Going to the forums and complaining does absolutely nothing to fix those types of issues. In most cases, it just creates more problems.
Use the chain of command to resolve your issues. VA→VL→VC→RVC→OPC
I also had recommended escalating up the chain (that part was cut off in the quote). I am taken aback by your statement that appears to imply that I am going to the forums to complain. If I do have an issue with the way that the organized play campaign is run, I will use every resource available, including escalating up the chain and bringing attention to the issue on the forums. I would agree that it is better to attempt to make constructive posts here, but this is one of our avenues for "complaints" and I don't think people should be discouraged from expressing their opinions here. I do think that they should be encouraged to do so in the most constructive way they can in order to avoid making people respond reflexively, but I would never suggest that people should avoid posting here on any issue that concerns them.
As for why those with whom I have spoken about RSP issues are reluctant to escalate their concerns, my impression was something similar to what Wei Ji expressed - they felt that it was more trouble than it was worth. I have not heard about any instances of blowback for whistleblowers, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen or that people aren't afraid of the consequences if it does. You can't un-ring the bell and most people are going to assume that the upper levels of campaign leadership are going to come down on the side of the people further down the chain. As a volunteer myself, I would like to think that those above me will have my back if a dispute needs to be resolved. That said, I would think long and hard about the possible negative consequences before I escalated above my RVC. I wouldn't hesitate to throw my Venture Captain, Michael Eshleman, under the bus and you'd know why if you know Michael (that's a joke).