Nefreet |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am optimistic about the upcoming Achievement Point system and the potential to finally balance participation in the Campaign with rewards for involvement.
I am also unfortunately cynical about the potential for frustration and delays that are out of a player's ability to control, and I'm wondering if there's been discussion about how to mitigate them.
Case#1: Unreportable Adventures
There is a well known ferret here in the Forums that is never hesitant to point out when a newly released Adventure remains unreportable. I had honestly been blind to the issue until seeing post after post pointing out reporting delays. For some APs, months passed before reporting became available.
Case#2: Unreported Adventures
This issue increases alongside tenure with the Campaign. It could happen with busy Conventions, typos, and even local games where a GM just takes their time to report stuff. I've reached out twice to my VC about games *I* GMed back in December and as of right now they're still unreported.
Errors happen, and for most of Organized Play history it's just been an annoyance. But with Achievement Points, I can see this usually benign complaint becoming a full scale headache about barriers to play. We already saw this with regards to Playtest Points.
And I have a very real example. I am two games away from having enough Achievement Points to play a Lizardfolk, and a handful of games away from needing to make a new character that can play in Tier 1-4 games. I foresee a problem where the implementation of AcP goes live, and there's a glitch that prevents me from acquiring the Boon I need to make my new character in time.
So my question boils down to: is there going to be some rule or policy in place to accommodate players who are held back by errors in the reporting system, or are we really expected to wait until the stars align and everything is fixed (whenever or however long that takes)? If someone's short X AcP due to an error, will they be able to just use a placeholder until the Boon they want is finally available? Because if we can't, I can foresee this becoming a common thorn for Society members of all types.
NECR0G1ANT Venture-Lieutenant, Virginia—Richmond |
Z...D... Venture-Lieutenant, Maryland—Hagerstown |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have known some GMs to not report stand alone games for months at a time, then the next time in, I get credited for 10-15 games. That is over 40 points worth of ACP we can not spend on these boons.
So far the solutions I heard in the other thread is that the RVC's and VC's can make adjustments.
I hardly see my VC/RVC outside of conventions. I can only imagine the time delay for those of us who live in the yondersphere and have no VC close and are probably not even on the radar of the RVC.
zeonsghost Venture-Captain, Wisconsin—Franklin |
The system seems very prone to human error. I've started double checking numbers when I fill out chronicles and doing my reporting at the table. That isn't tenable at cons for lots of GMs and there's not really a good safety net other than track down a GM or VC and bother them to do it (which isn't great).
Maybe a player reporting feature using the event code for an existing event would be doable? If there's a concern for abuse, it could be capped at so many per year. Just sort of spitballing here.
Gary Bush Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha |
Xathos of Varisia Venture-Captain, Missouri—Columbia |
The only issues I've ever had in reporting the few hundred sessions I've ran is when the player either didn't write legibly, wrote the wrong numbers down, or I entered the wrong numbers which as far as I can remember was caused by players not writing legibly in 99% of the cases. I've made my e-mail addresses available to the players so that they can contact me when errors were made.
Gen Con 2019 went pretty smoothly as far as I could tell for reporting. I haven't had any issues with Cog Con reporting, Quin Con reporting or any online con reporting.
I don't see where there's going to be much that can be done on the reporting end other than contacting VOs about it and getting GMs to report consistently. That's going to come from the players pressuring the GMs to do it and do it right. A player could always volunteer to do the reporting for those GMs. In fact, it could be done right then and there as soon as the game is over thanks to the wonderful Internet.
One thing that should help is that the NDAs have gone out to the VOs finally after a ridiculously long delay. I got mine, signed it, and got confirmation back. So the VO corps should be vastly increased and on the job with the ability to address issues like reporting to Paizo accurately and timely.
Dragnmoon |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Things on our side as well have to happen to make this run smoothly.
GM/Organizer Responsibility - Report your games! No longer can people say that the chronicle sheet is what is important not what is reported.
Player - remind your GMs/Organizers obsessively to report the games! I mean really bug them, do it every day if you have to. I have had a few game reported wrong and this seemed to work for me, be annoying about it! My reported games are 100% accurate over 12 years in PFS play. Know who to complain to, I can't emphasis how important this is. If you have a game day find out who is responsible for reporting the game and their contact info. If you go to a convention ask the Organizer staff who is responsible for reporting the game and their contact info to fix any problems if they show up.
On Paizo Side - Give the ability to the VCs and RVCs the ability to fix reporting errors as a last resort.
Marc Waschle |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Something that I have been doing since GENCON 50 is taking a photo of my session sheet before I turn it in. I DO THIS EVERY TIME! That way if there is a problem, months after the CON, or if it takes months to for a report to show up, I can send the person responsible/VO/Organizers a copy with my email pointing out the problem.
I believe this will have to become the rule instead of the exception going forward in Organized Play.
Kitsune Kune Venture-Lieutenant, North Carolina—Durham |
One thing that should help is that the NDAs have gone out to the VOs finally after a ridiculously long delay. I got mine, signed it, and got confirmation back. So the VO corps should be vastly increased and on the job with the ability to address issues like reporting to Paizo accurately and timely.
Still waiting on mine, so not all have gone out.
NielsenE |
Xathos of Varisia wrote:Still waiting on mine, so not all have gone out.
One thing that should help is that the NDAs have gone out to the VOs finally after a ridiculously long delay. I got mine, signed it, and got confirmation back. So the VO corps should be vastly increased and on the job with the ability to address issues like reporting to Paizo accurately and timely.
^ ditto.
Xathos of Varisia Venture-Captain, Missouri—Columbia |
Kitsune Kune wrote:^ ditto.Xathos of Varisia wrote:Still waiting on mine, so not all have gone out.
One thing that should help is that the NDAs have gone out to the VOs finally after a ridiculously long delay. I got mine, signed it, and got confirmation back. So the VO corps should be vastly increased and on the job with the ability to address issues like reporting to Paizo accurately and timely.
I believe they are going region by region.
Gary Bush Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Something that I have been doing since GENCON 50 is taking a photo of my session sheet before I turn it in. I DO THIS EVERY TIME! That way if there is a problem, months after the CON, or if it takes months to for a report to show up, I can send the person responsible/VO/Organizers a copy with my email pointing out the problem.
I believe this will have to become the rule instead of the exception going forward in Organized Play.
At the last GenCon, GMs were asked to take pictures of their sheets. It is a good thing too because about half of my tables got lost,
Nefreet |
I do take pictures, but when you're not the event organizer, you can't do the reporting.
But, say I didn't take a picture. I have a Chronicle worth 4 AcP, and I'm 4 AcP short of Boon.
Would it be acceptable to use a proxy in place of the official Boon sheet until the AcPs align and I can finally print Boon?
Gary Bush Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha |
cavernshark Venture-Agent, Texas—Austin |
Gary Bush Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha |
Gary Bush Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha |
I think it is a bad idea that will be rift with abuse and cheating.
I don't trust players not to take advantage of something. History is a good teacher.
Magic is different and I don't play (realized how much of a money stink it is back in the '90s). Do you need to show that you still own the card that is being proxyed? Isn't the point of a proxy is to protect a valuable card?
Gary Bush Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha |
zeonsghost Venture-Captain, Wisconsin—Franklin |
5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it is a bad idea that will be rift with abuse and cheating.
I don't trust players not to take advantage of something. History is a good teacher.
Magic is different and I don't play (realized how much of a money stink it is back in the '90s). Do you need to show that you still own the card that is being proxyed? Isn't the point of a proxy is to protect a valuable card?
I would rather prioritize making exception for players who've had GMs or event organizers fail to report. Cheaters are going to cheat anyways. If one really wanted a legitimate boon and had no problems cheating, nothing stops a cheater from creating 4 PFS numbers and assigning enough table credit to get whatever it is they want. As its not a competitive game, other players aren't directly harmed by a cheater. Whereas when a table isn't reported or is reported incorrectly that directly harms the player's access to materials. Minimizing direct harm to player experience due to human error seems to be a better way to foster a healthy player base versus treating all players like cheaters.
NielsenE |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is one of the things I was worried about with changing from a paper-first system of record, to a split paper/on-line system of record.
My preferred solution requires technical work, which might rule it out, would be to allow a player's ACP balance to go slightly negative -- by 4-12 points, -- to account for reporting delays/mix-ups. This wouldn't help with a late, large con (8 slots at a premier plus as a player --48 points, even more as a GM), but should help with most routine issues.
I see some evidence that con reporting has been improving and if the society play organizers within the cons know its more important to have accurate/timely reporting because of ACP, I'm willing to trust that the trend continues, or improves. (And hope the entire hierarchy of VOs works to keep it on track)
TwilightKnight Premier Event Coordinator |
Case#2: Unreported Adventures
If the event was a one-off or a GameDay, there is [almost] no excuse for not reporting within a week. If it was a convention, should be done within a month. After that, I would poke the organizer. I can only speak to my expectations, but I follow up with another poke after a second interval, and again a third time. If it still isn’t reported I begin to escalate the issue up the chain. Unfortunately, it sounds like your issue would have to go to the RVC. Three months is plenty of time for anyone to report a table.
As far as errors, I have recommended that everyone, player and GM alike take a picture of their table and keep it until the table is confirmed reported. It is especially hard to reconstruct a table after the fact and many VOs will refuse to report an incomplete or inaccurate table. Having an image to share is incredibly helpful and protects you. This is especially important now that your rewards are tied to accurate reporting.
I cannot stress this enough, write legibly when completing a reporting sheet. Not “good enough” but clear. Slow down if you need to and make sure other people can read what you wrote. GMs should review the sheet as if they had to report it to make sure everything is legible and all the info is completed. Unreadable/incomplete reporting sheets are responsible for more errors than any other cause.
Unless there is a change in the system when they finish reworking the scripts, RVC will have the ability to correct reporting errors just like they always have. I believe VCs will also have that access, but not sure.
Gary Bush Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha |
My preferred solution requires technical work, which might rule it out, would be to allow a player's ACP balance to go slightly negative -- by 4-12 points, -- to account for reporting delays/mix-ups.
I would prefer this to a proxy because it would be defined.
The problem will be, no matter what system we have, is player expectations. The only way to minimize it is to report the table while sitting at the table. Which may be unrealistic in some lodges.
Xathos of Varisia Venture-Captain, Missouri—Columbia |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I advocated for a scanning system at the cons a year or more ago and still do. The technology is available. We just need to develop a way to do it and implement it. If the website has been made robust enough to handle the AcP, then it should be robust enough to handle a scanning system inputting data on game play.
Kromkore |
Emphasis on the "legitimate" part.
You obviously couldn't proxy something you didn't own.
But if you are waiting on 4 AcP to be reported and you're about to play #1-88: Leshy's Reign with your Leshy that you can't yet print, that is going to create warranted frustration.
as someone who did a lot of tournament you cannot proxy any card in a tournament only thing close to it is 2 faced card that had special card to mark which one it is and you need the real card in your deck box. it was only allowed so you dont get a penalty because we could see the card through the sleeves
Gary Bush Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha |
I advocated for a scanning system at the cons a year or more ago and still do. The technology is available. We just need to develop a way to do it and implement it. If the website has been made robust enough to handle the AcP, then it should be robust enough to handle a scanning system inputting data on game play.
I have been trying to think of a good format for reporting sheets to allow this happen.
Ascalaphus Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Xathos of Varisia wrote:I advocated for a scanning system at the cons a year or more ago and still do. The technology is available. We just need to develop a way to do it and implement it. If the website has been made robust enough to handle the AcP, then it should be robust enough to handle a scanning system inputting data on game play.I have been trying to think of a good format for reporting sheets to allow this happen.
I've also been thinking about this. I'm thinking in the direction of a PFS app that can scan QR codes on chronicles, other peoples' phones and convention badges.
It needs to be pretty robust, because most ideas I've tossed out got shot down on "but don't you know the wifi at [venue] is terrible" or "but not everyone has a smartphone".
Gary Bush Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gary Bush wrote:Xathos of Varisia wrote:I advocated for a scanning system at the cons a year or more ago and still do. The technology is available. We just need to develop a way to do it and implement it. If the website has been made robust enough to handle the AcP, then it should be robust enough to handle a scanning system inputting data on game play.I have been trying to think of a good format for reporting sheets to allow this happen.I've also been thinking about this. I'm thinking in the direction of a PFS app that can scan QR codes on chronicles, other peoples' phones and convention badges.
It needs to be pretty robust, because most ideas I've tossed out got shot down on "but don't you know the wifi at [venue] is terrible" or "but not everyone has a smartphone".
We should work together offline to see what we can brain storm. Maybe on the new VO discord server?
Xathos of Varisia Venture-Captain, Missouri—Columbia |
I am not the greatest tech whiz, so this is theoretical in practice. I thought that each scenario/quest/module/AP section should have a bar code. Every player # would have a bar code as would every character. Using a smartphone app, one person at a table could do the scanning work to gather the information needed. At the end of the session, anything extra could be input (Box A, extra rep, deaths, purchases, and expenditures, etc.) onto the app and then uploaded either then or when the recorder had Internet access.
For a con, the same thing could be done. For the big cons, we could see something similar via either the marshals or someone going table to table to do the scanning. GMs could turn in sheets and then the Con recorder could do the final adjustments from them onto the app and upload to Paizo right then and there.
New Players would be covered by New Player cards which automatically generate a matching character code set to -2001. Players still have to go to Paizo and put the rudiments of player data in so they can accumulate and spend AcP like they do now.
Just a quick thought to get started.
TwilightKnight Premier Event Coordinator |
The issue isn’t the feasibility or design of a scannable reporting sheet. It’s the Paizo tech team creating and managing the scripts for it. We have some system improvements for OP on the list for years. The reporting system works so there is no pressure to upgrade it. I wouldn’t hold my breath for something like that any time in the foreseeable future. Maintenance and upgrades to the PoS (point of sale) system is always going to be priority. When it’s not broken, they are working on improvements.
Ascalaphus Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The issue isn’t the feasibility or design of a scannable reporting sheet. It’s the Paizo tech team creating and managing the scripts for it. We have some system improvements for OP on the list for years. The reporting system works so there is no pressure to upgrade it. I wouldn’t hold my breath for something like that any time in the foreseeable future. Maintenance and upgrades to the PoS (point of sale) system is always going to be priority. When it’s not broken, they are working on improvements.
I think this is a bit defeatist. Using that logic, Warhorn and the Sessiontracker wouldn't exist either.
It'd be lovely if it could all be one integrated site under Paizo's umbrella, but if we can't have that, we can try something else.
TwilightKnight Premier Event Coordinator |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It’s not defeatist, it’s pragmatic. Why do we want to pile more “crap” onto the backlog pile? The moment we do, it’s just one more thing for the community to complain about that is known but not yet implemented. Under promise and over deliver is something we are missing recently in OP. I’m not saying that more efficient reporting system isn’t a good idea, it’s just that we really need to let Paizo get caught up before we bury them under more stuff. YMMV
Doug Hahn |
7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Beyond human error/ laziness/terrible reporting design, my main concern is the fact NONE of my area VAs/co-VL have had their NDAs returned; some have been waiting over 2 years now. We don't even ask Tonya anymore.
Sorry, as an adult managing other volunteers who run games I'm really not into requiring my busy VAs to take MORE time out of their busy lives to rush reporting games — not when Paizo won't lift a finger to even recognize them as volunteers in a timely fashion.
Give us a proxy: a boon the organizer can sign and date for games GM'd/played. Make it like the old race boon sheet from the last few seasons.
And please stop asking Paizo to design against the lowest common denominator players (cheaters) when it only hurts the people who are actually working hard in their free time to make events happen and communities thrive — people who are often doing it for no official recognition.
Saint Bernard de Clairveaux |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And please stop asking Paizo to design against the lowest common denominator players (cheaters) when it only hurts the people who are actually working hard in their free time to make events happen and communities thrive — people who are often doing it for no official recognition.
Agreed. There's a very reliable method to deal with cheaters who spoil everyone's fun: Social norms. We want the Society to be open to all, but if they break norms they can and should be disinvited.
zeonsghost Venture-Captain, Wisconsin—Franklin |
Beyond human error/ laziness/terrible reporting design, my main concern is the fact NONE of my area VAs/co-VL have had their NDAs returned; some have been waiting over 2 years now. We don't even ask Tonya anymore.
Sorry, as an adult managing other volunteers who run games I'm really not into requiring my busy VAs to take MORE time out of their busy lives to rush reporting games — not when Paizo won't lift a finger to even recognize them as volunteers in a timely fashion.
Give us a proxy: a boon the organizer can sign and date for games GM'd/played. Make it like the old race boon sheet from the last few seasons.
And please stop asking Paizo to design against the lowest common denominator players (cheaters) when it only hurts the people who are actually working hard in their free time to make events happen and communities thrive — people who are often doing it for no official recognition.
So, non-venture person here and I have questions. I just want to make sure I'm following the conversation. Are venture officers of all ranks supposed to be able to fix reporting issues in a world where whatever this NDA is for works correctly? Or is it just VCs and regional leads who are supposed to be able to do that? Also, where is the contact information for VOs? I thought it was on the Paizo website, but I can't for the life of me find it anymore.
I ask because last I checked, all but one of the VOs in my state had either stepped down or been removed. I'm getting contacted about whose organizing for local cons and from players whose tables haven't been reported by other GMs. I think something this boon sheet proxy a GM can sign off are great for someone like me, who can't really knock on people above me for support and wants to rebuild a community that's fallen off the last couple years.
Doug Hahn |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Are venture officers of all ranks supposed to be able to fix reporting issues in a world where whatever this NDA is for works correctly? Or is it just VCs and regional leads who are supposed to be able to do that?
I believe it's just VCs. I might be wrong about that as I have asked all VAs in my area to add me as a designated reporter on their events so I can amend/report to help get things done quickly.
Also, where is the contact information for VOs? I thought it was on the Paizo website, but I can't for the life of me find it anymore.
Used to be here: https://paizo.com/organizedplay/coordinators but it looks like there's a redirect issue bugging the page out.
Now, you can find the RVCs here (but not the VCs/VLs/VAs like they used to have on the Paizo site): http://www.organizedplayfoundation.org/organized-play-regions/
I'm getting contacted about whose organizing for local cons and from players whose tables haven't been reported by other GMs.
You should definitely contect your RVC about that; hopefully someone on the list above can help. You might also want to ask in the org play forum and note your region (if you're comfortable doing so) if you need assistance or are looking to coordinate with local leadership.
I think something this boon sheet proxy a GM can sign off are great for someone like me, who can't really knock on people above me for support and wants to rebuild a community that's fallen off the last couple years.
Yep. People like you working to build their communities are the ones that we should be supporting/concerned with here… at least, in my opinion. Organized Play doesn't happen without volunteers and community leaders; they should be given the tools to succeed.
Failing to support or even recognize the individuals who're volunteering to do the hard work is a fast way to destroy communities from the inside out.
zeonsghost Venture-Captain, Wisconsin—Franklin |
TwilightKnight Premier Event Coordinator |
NDAs
The NDAs have been in limbo for a long time due to a number of issues some of which were outside the purview of the OPM/OPF. However, just a couple of weeks ago a revised version of the NDA started to be distributed. The process started with the RVCs and will filter down to the other roles. All VOs should be on the look out for their notice and communicating with their RVC to complete it. Once that is done and the new OPA is in place, we will start to see the VO maintenance updated which will trigger all the positional incentives.
reporting
Reporting is not just for Paizo's benefit. Players and GMs depend on those reports to track their gaming history including by not limited to stars/novas/glyphs. It is not fair to them to withhold the reporting because you are unhappy with Paizo. That greatly increases the chances the records will be lost so when reporting is finally completed, things are missing or reported incorrectly. Withholding reports is not going to make Paizo go any faster.
TwilightKnight Premier Event Coordinator |
Also, where is the contact information for VOs? I thought it was on the Paizo website, but I can't for the life of me find it anymore.
Used to be here: https://paizo.com/organizedplay/coordinators but it looks like there's a redirect issue bugging the page out.
Now, you can find the RVCs here (but not the VCs/VLs/VAs like they used to have on the Paizo site): http://www.organizedplayfoundation.org/organized-play-regions/
Since we are moving forward with the Guide and related information being hosted on the OPF site, the coordinators page on the Paizo site was removed. It was significantly out of date anyway. I believe the expectation is that once the NDA process is complete, we will have an accurate list of VOs again and they will be added to where the RVC list is.
Doug Hahn |
Doug Hahn wrote:NDAsThe NDAs have been in limbo for a long time due to a number of issues some of which were outside the purview of the OPM/OPF. However, just a couple of weeks ago a revised version of the NDA started to be distributed. The process started with the RVCs and will filter down to the other roles. All VOs should be on the look out for their notice and communicating with their RVC to complete it. Once that is done and the new OPA is in place, we will start to see the VO maintenance updated which will trigger all the positional incentives.
Doug Hahn wrote:reportingReporting is not just for Paizo's benefit. Players and GMs depend on those reports to track their gaming history including by not limited to stars/novas/glyphs. It is not fair to them to withhold the reporting because you are unhappy with Paizo. That greatly increases the chances the records will be lost so when reporting is finally completed, things are missing or reported incorrectly. Withholding reports is not going to make Paizo go any faster.
People waiting 2 years for their NDA has nothing to do with the new NDA. It hasn't been in limbo that long. It took me over a year to get my (old) NDA signed. It's completely disingenuous to act like this is a new problem with the new NDA.
No one is "withholding reporting" — however, if we have volunteers waiting 2+ years to get acknowledgment for their hard work, then I would not expect them to take time out of their busy lives to report on a more frequent basis. The honest truth is that reporting is somethign no one wants to do: it's a pain in the butt, the system is outdated, the website is unreliable, and MANY of us are waiting for things to be reported or have been missing things for years.
Sorry, but it's a 2-way street. If your new system is dependent solely on volunteers putting in extra effort to get reporting done as quickly as possible so others can purchase boons, then they should at least be acknowledged.
Or, provide some sort of fallback so volunteers have a little less pressure in terms of reporting. That has my vote: it seems like a sensible and simple solution that addresses the ongoing weak points in the reporting system.
TwilightKnight Premier Event Coordinator |
There are a lot of issues that have prevented the NDAs from being processed for the past two years including issues with the NDA itself, behind the scenes processing problems, lack of accuracy regarding VO vital data, adherence to the GDPR, legal approval, separation of Paizo from the OPF, etc. Yes, the OP team has to accept responsibility for some of it, but not all of it. There were things happening (or more importantly not happening) that effected Tonya's ability to complete the process. We might not like it, but its the simple truth.
Doug Hahn |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are a lot of issues that have prevented the NDAs from being processed for the past two years including issues with the NDA itself, behind the scenes processing problems, lack of accuracy regarding VO vital data, adherence to the GDPR, legal approval, separation of Paizo from the OPF, etc. Yes, the OP team has to accept responsibility for some of it, but not all of it. There were things happening (or more importantly not happening) that effected Tonya's ability to complete the process. We might not like it, but its the simple truth.
Consistent, ongoing issues are just more reasons why we need fallbacks to accommodate GMs who need reporting — the AcP system shouldn't be dependant on volunteers who have not signed NDAs or received acknowledgment from Org Play.
Yet right now, it is. And adding to the pressure is pretty unfair to the many volunteers who have been waiting for their NDAs while continuing to do the work without acknowledgment.
Wei Ji the Learner |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
When a customer is told 'SOON' for long enough, they stop having faith and go to another retailer for an inferior product that is guaranteed to 'be in stock'.
Said customers will be tired of hearing any sort of reasonableness surrounding the 'SOON'.
Those that are vocal enough about it will say something, usually with a lot of rancor directed towards folks who have no control over the situation whatsoever, and assume by raising their voices that something will Get Fixed.
Sadly, it at best makes for 'white noise', and it drowns out legitimate concerns on both sides of the equation.
Yet, paradoxically, one is attacked for 'not being transparent enough' or 'not getting information out in a timely fashion'.
In this particular instance, though, linking a much-needed system to an undeveloped one was probably not the best of ideas, and some interim measure should have been put in place to 'bridge the gap' until the permanent system was available.
There were hints that this might be an issue as far back as the launch of Starfinder, with the splitting of OrgPlay's attention (at the time) three different major ways (ACG/PF/SF). With the launch of PF2 and the maintenance of PF1, the stressors on the system are even more apparent.
Not sure what the solution would be, but hopefully the reactionary move of burn the whole thing to the ground and 'start over' isn't being considered.
TwilightKnight Premier Event Coordinator |
the AcP system shouldn't be dependant on volunteers who have not signed NDAs or received acknowledgment from Org Play.
Yet right now, it is. And adding to the pressure is pretty unfair to the many volunteers who have been waiting for their NDAs while continuing to do the work without acknowledgment.
You're conflating two unrelated issues. The AcP program has nothing to do with the NDAs. Its based on reporting which has nothing to do with VO status. The reason why AcP isn't functional is because the Paizo tech team needs to program the scripts that will control functionality on the website and so far, they either haven't had time to complete it or are experiencing problems with the results, likely both.
Doug Hahn |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Doug Hahn wrote:You're conflating two unrelated issues. The AcP program has nothing to do with the NDAs. Its based on reporting which has nothing to do with VO status. The reason why AcP isn't functional is because the Paizo tech team needs to program the scripts that will control functionality on the website and so far, they either haven't had time to complete it or are experiencing problems with the results, likely both.the AcP system shouldn't be dependant on volunteers who have not signed NDAs or received acknowledgment from Org Play.
Yet right now, it is. And adding to the pressure is pretty unfair to the many volunteers who have been waiting for their NDAs while continuing to do the work without acknowledgment.
I'm not sure you understand my point here.
Volunteers do most of the reporting for org play. That's a fact. So, the issues of reporting and NDAs are indeed closely related: if you want reporting done quickly and with accuracy because your new system is completely dependant on that, then the volunteers wh are actually doing that reporting should all have ALL the support you can give them. This support includes having their titles and their NDAs signed — the NDAs are a big part of that support!
Right now, many volunteers are not getting the support they need. Yet the tone of the conversation here is that they should be under even more pressure to report things right away. Doesn't seem very fair, does it?
This is one reason why Paizo/Org Play should compromise and accommodate people who may be dealing with delayed reporting. Don't put more burden on volunteers who are already struggling and not getting the support they deserve from Org Play.
TwilightKnight Premier Event Coordinator |
Volunteers do most of the reporting for org play. That's a fact.
That may be a fact in your area, but it is not universally true across the community. There are a lot of areas where the VO/organizer leaves it to the table GM to report. This is especially helpful in highly active areas with lots of games and participants. VOs are not required to report all events, they are just required to ensure all reporting is being done for events they organize. Rather than expect one person to report what could be dozens of tables, the GM can report their couple/few more quickly and efficiently. If a single VO is overseeing multiple tables at multiple weekly events, yes it might be a big job to keep up with reporting and perhaps it should be looked at for improvement, regardless of the status of NDAs or AcP.
I disagree with the depiction of timely reporting being "more pressure" or an added burden. It has always been the expectation since before there were VOs. The larger an event, the more time is generally accepted by players. I just don't see a correlation between reporting completed events and other aspects of the program but, since enforcement of this falls within the purview of the VO hierarchy you do you and I'll do me.
Explore! Report! Cooperate!