• Welcome to NIWA Community Forums.
 

Improving NIWA

Started by Xizor, December 14, 2010, 10:52:43 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

BrandedOne

Quote from: tacopill on December 21, 2010, 07:54:13 PM
Which means, topology-wise, we currently have a 17-orthoplex, rather than just a Heptadecagon.

Who's the seventeenth member? NIWA itself?

tacopill

Quote from: BrandedOne on December 21, 2010, 10:26:00 PM
Quote from: tacopill on December 21, 2010, 07:54:13 PM
Which means, topology-wise, we currently have a 17-orthoplex, rather than just a Heptadecagon.

Who's the seventeenth member? NIWA itself?

Yeap. Included in all the links to all the other wikis, i usually see a link back to niwa-itself.







Xizor

But NIWA is still only the sum of its parts, not a separate part altogether.



Bureaucrat of

tacopill

Quote from: Xizor on December 22, 2010, 01:58:43 AM
But NIWA is still only the sum of its parts, not a separate part altogether.

Ok, now i'm confused again.

If NIWA wasn't a separates part altogether, we wouldn't have a hub to link to. or Forums to post on.







Volatile Dweevil

I'm pretty sure that what he means is that the hub and forums are separate parts, but they are not NIWA until the other parts (the wikis) are added.

SnorlaxMonster

I would rather think that the hub/forum/etc. is in the center of the simplex.

tacopill

Quote from: Volatile Dweevil on December 22, 2010, 05:31:49 AM
I'm pretty sure that what he means is that the hub and forums are separate parts, but they are not NIWA until the other parts (the wikis) are added.

Ok, That makes more sense. So the idea of NIWA is separates than the hub and the forums.

Now, i am curious: does this mean the forums represent a separate node on the simplex than the hub page? hm....

See Network topology, if anyone are not familiar with my use of the term "Node".



Quote from: SnorlaxMonster on December 22, 2010, 09:47:37 AM
I would rather think that the hub/forum/etc. is in the center of the simplex.

I personally will agree with you. But don't forget, There exists at least one connection between each wiki that doesn't go through the hub. It sort of complicates things.

I'd draw a map of this, but by the time i was finished, we might have a new member. ;D



To end my post, i'd like to suggest NIWA's next Topology:
[spoiler]

[/spoiler]

;D







Moydow

Quote from: tacopill on December 22, 2010, 03:11:04 PM
Quote from: SnorlaxMonster on December 22, 2010, 09:47:37 AM
I would rather think that the hub/forum/etc. is in the center of the simplex.

I personally will agree with you. But don't forget, There exists at least one connection between each wiki that doesn't go through the hub. It sort of complicates things.

This is true. Take, for example, StrategyWiki. Before joining NIWA, we had partnerships with three members of NIWA: Bulbapedia, ZeldaWiki.org, and WiKirby. See here for our Partnerships page. We retained those partnerships when we joined NIWA, and I believe there are plans to make such arrangements with the other members of NIWA.
NIWA Coordinator

Xizor

You guys are making this way too complicated. Seriously.



Bureaucrat of

KidIcarus

#49
I have a suggestion. Maybe we should make the NIWA Coordinator and Forum Administrator position a rotating position. I don't mean to point any fingers at anyone, but this would prevent any hypothetical user in that position from ever becoming too controlling or arrogant. Furthermore, it could open NIWA to new and exciting ideas. Just imagine how NIWA's growth could end if a closed-minded coordinator were in charge for too long. Again, this is all hypothetical, and I don't mean to point any fingers at anyone...

tacopill

Quote from: Xizor on December 23, 2010, 10:55:41 AM
You guys are making this way too complicated. Seriously.

It's what i do.  ;D.

Quote from: vince220 on December 23, 2010, 10:35:19 PM
I have a suggestion. Maybe we should make the NIWA Coordinator and Forum Administrator position a rotating position. I don't mean to point any fingers at anyone, but this would prevent any hypothetical user in that position from ever becoming too controlling or arrogant. Furthermore, it could open NIWA to new and exciting ideas. Just imagine how NIWA's growth could end if a closed-minded coordinator were in charge for too long. Again, this is all hypothetical, and I don't mean to point any fingers at anyone...

I like this suggestion. Rotation of a position is very helpful. Helps Keeps it fresh, ensures new ideas are always coming in. (Not that they aren't now. I just want to keep it going :) )







Miles of SmashWiki

So long as the position stays stable, moving it around could have benefits.


Srsbsns is always lurking (?_?)

Maxite

I like the idea of rotating positions. From my experience, that seems to work better than having person constantly in charge.

Xizor

Given that we created the position about two months ago, it's a bit soon to discuss getting rid of me. ;)

(A joke, in case someone's typing up a raging reply at this very moment. Let's keep ideas flowing.)



Bureaucrat of

Maxite

#54
Having the position rotate once every year or two wouldn't be bad. Or we could just have a two-term limit, with each term being a year, and if the staff think the incumbent is doing good after the first year they can grant them another year to continue with their work, although that might be overly complicated for NIWA.
Lots of things that can be done there to try and get new blood in, but still keep competent leadership.

Moving onto a next subject, and it relates to the DAWN thread:

I've gotten to know a decent amount of staff members since I've joined NIWA, so I know how they work. I haven't met everyone, but I will agree that in general the staff aren't plotting behind the scenes to try and take over the internet, and that they are generally competent.

However, my main concern is the point that was brought up about "secrecy", or the perceived imbalance of secrecy. While I can't give an opinion on what the balance is--and even though the staff can give an opinion it can't be demonstrated--my honest guess is that the problem isn't with secrecy, but with lack of clear communication.

A lot of confusing or misleading or misrepresented information is on these boards. There's also a decent amount of misinformation as well. The lack of communication to clear up these blunders is most likely what contributes to a lot of the angst and perception that "the staff are incompetent or power hungry, or that there is an imbalance of secrecy."

One recent issue that came up was presented as if a simplistic wiki was going to be made a part of NIWA in some official capacity, and it drove me bonkers (my apologies to all parties involve who I may have offended) because I believed that the decision was in the final process of being approved. It might have been best to move the thread to the Staff section, or for someone to come in and say "This matter has not yet been decided, the staff are still looking over it."

A bit of communication (or some moderation) would have been really effective in reducing confusion for me and other parties. For my part, I will now start bringing up information that has unverified legitimacy to trusted parties and get their input on the matter before I start making critical remarks, which will most likely be sent directly to the appropriate parties instead of in threads.

Do I expect this communication issue to be solved overnight? No. But I do hope that strides will be taken to promote clear communication channels between the public and staff so that issues of miscommunication can be abated if not completely avoided.

Unfortunately, from what I have gathered, NIWA doesn't have a lot of policies or procedures, so I'm not sure I can give a suggestion for how to directly correct the problem, but my best guess would be to:
1. Set up relevant communication policies. This includes setting up proper channels for fielding questions about information from the public, as well as disseminating official information to the public.
2. Either have every staff member informed (or "trained") on how to handle basic public relations, or give the job to certain staff members who can be more focused on the issue. The latter would also provide more clarity to the public in who to go for more information on topics. I will acknowledge that a lot of staff members are busy with other projects, but if a few could dedicate a few minutes a day to answering questions that would be a wonderful start.
3. As a last resort, set up an official "Public Relations Coordinator" position to coordinate communication channels so that there is a dedicated staff to the issue. This idea is likely to be excessive for NIWA, but if set up properly could be very useful in not just giving clear information out to the general public, but in helping to coordinate projects with the member wikis and work with affiliates or interested parties.

Nintendoguy1

OK, I think that this is similar to something I read on Bulbanews earlier today.

The Bulbanews article said that the elemental monkeys names were accidentally leaked. Now, the accidental leaking was not confirmed by Nintendo and is just something put out by one of their commercials accidentally. Now, that is similar to a situation where a member of the NIWA staff puts out information into a thread. The information could be true, it is probably true but it is not confirmed true.

HOWEVER if Nintendo now went out to a press contest and outright said "these are the official names", the information would be confirmed. But Nintendo hasn't, it's still unconfirmed and just speculated. Just like with NIWA, if the NIWA staff outright tell you that something is happening; it is confirmed. But if they mention it in public discussions, it is only speculation.

Basically, take the things we say with a grain of salt.


(see that's why Edofenrir is awesome)

Xizor

"Public Relations Coordinator" What do you think I am? :P

I agree, though, that there has been misinformation, but with such a large and often chaotic project, it was unavoidable. We're reigning it in. Remember that NIWA only started in February, guys, and underwent a massive reform effort, mostly from July through October, but that still continues today.



Bureaucrat of

Jake

#57
QuoteOne recent issue that came up was presented as if a simplistic wiki was going to be made a part of NIWA in some official capacity, and it drove me bonkers (my apologies to all parties involve who I may have offended) because I believed that the decision was in the final process of being approved. It might have been best to move the thread to the Staff section, or for someone to come in and say "This matter has not yet been decided, the staff are still looking over it."
I assume that was directed at this post? I didn't find it necessary to state specifically that "we're still looking into it", but if it pleases you than I will be sure to do so in the future. In my defense, I did clearly state that the topic was about a member request. By definition, a request is "an act of asking politely or formally for something". In no way did I imply that we were in any specific stage of negotiation with the wiki. I'd really appreciate it if you could stop using your own assumptions against the NIWA staff. (Your post even states that it was your own belief.)

Let's base things on the facts, shall we? Many of your other points make a lot of sense, so don't think that I'm just trying to disagree with you outright.

Maxite

I'm not blaming any single staff members for failure to clear up information. There is no one person who deserves the blame, and I don't think it'd be appropriate to assign blame anyways. The first poster, who is not staff, made it appear through the thread title that "I'm in", and the first post made it appear on first impressions that his wiki was being let into NIWA.
The ambiguity lies in the "I'm in" thread title, and the first post, which nobody really cared to directly address. If they had, there would have been a comment to the effect of "Nobody is "in" just yet, we're still looking into the matter." No such elaboration or correction was made.

As far as bashing the staff based on what is and isn't fact, that is exactly the problem I am trying to point out. If I can't tell what is and isn't fact in these cases, then there is a problem that needs to be addressed. While yes, I should have asked for clarification if I had questions, it is not unreasonable to assume what is posted on these boards is factual to an extent, and to base comments and critique on those assumptions. I'm just a common member; I don't have access to the staff boards, so I don't know how far along you are in the negotiations. I have to make a judgment based on how things are worded, and the phrase "I'm in" is most certainly not commonly used to indicate that it's the starting phase of a request.

I do not wish to assign blame to anyone in particular for these problems, as I think everyone carries some blame for these problems. I am not seeking to further push any blame, I am asking that these problems be addressed and fixed so that they do not happen again.

tacopill

Quote from: Maxite on December 26, 2010, 12:44:36 AM
I'm not blaming any single staff members for failure to clear up information. There is no one person who deserves the blame, and I don't think it'd be appropriate to assign blame anyways. The first poster, who is not staff, made it appear through the thread title that "I'm in", and the first post made it appear on first impressions that his wiki was being let into NIWA.
The ambiguity lies in the "I'm in" thread title, and the first post, which nobody really cared to directly address. If they had, there would have been a comment to the effect of "Nobody is "in" just yet, we're still looking into the matter." No such elaboration or correction was made.

As far as bashing the staff based on what is and isn't fact, that is exactly the problem I am trying to point out. If I can't tell what is and isn't fact in these cases, then there is a problem that needs to be addressed. While yes, I should have asked for clarification if I had questions, it is not unreasonable to assume what is posted on these boards is factual to an extent, and to base comments and critique on those assumptions. I'm just a common member; I don't have access to the staff boards, so I don't know how far along you are in the negotiations. I have to make a judgment based on how things are worded, and the phrase "I'm in" is most certainly not commonly used to indicate that it's the starting phase of a request.

I do not wish to assign blame to anyone in particular for these problems, as I think everyone carries some blame for these problems. I am not seeking to further push any blame, I am asking that these problems be addressed and fixed so that they do not happen again.

Maxite, please keep in mind, that you are under the same or similar conditions that we are. This is a text- and image-only environment and the tone or attitude you are thinking or speaking in your posts is not always what they are read in. 

For me personally, i've learned it helps to put visual markers to help clearify what i mean in my text. If i am making a joke in a serious thread, i place something there to say "This is a joke", ":P", etc. If i am making a statement that sounds like it could come from an official decision maker of the staff, i do my best to put in "I", "In my opinion" and/or a disclaimer like "I am not an elected or appointed representative of NIWA".

I don't know how truely effective it is. But it seems to work, since outcomes i fear of misinterpretions of my statements don't seem to come to pass.

Just a suggestion.  :)