SK, I didn't say it was a perfect system, but it is a system and it would be very fast to put together. Unfortunately there is no way to completely disspell the OBC perception. Somebody is always going to be new or come from the sidelines and their ideas are not going to be well received. The first thing they will say is "oh, it's because I don't have enough posts" or some other ridiculous comment.

Food for thought - there is something to be said about an OBC to an extent. The purpose of the NetEA Committee (in any form) is to perpetuate the game and to help it survive and thrive. That takes effort, but above all it takes wisdom. Somebody who has been around the block knows the neighborhood and the reasons why things are they way they are. Unlike a government where there is sufficient reason to be representative; the NetEA needs to be experienced and well versed in the game. Even if you could have an election, it makes little sense to have one in which people who have little to no experience in the aspects of the game can suddenly become the Top Dog (I'm not saying that would happen, only that it could).

The other thing to consider is there is very little to gain for an Army Champ in alienating the player base. Nobody is getting paid to do any of this. It's not like there are going to be corruption charges against Rug for accepting bribes to lower the cost of Rough Riders to 50 points per formation. For example, you wouldn't want me being the Chaos Champion. I don't participate in those threads, I don't like Chaos, they annoy me. But who would be better suited to know this other than the people who spend the most time here and volunteer themselves?

Putting the ACs in charge doesn't alienate them from the people anymore than where things were before. Hena was SM AC. Neal was/is the Ork AC. Chroma was AC for the Eldar, Tyranids, and probably something else too. The difference is that now if you have a problem with a list, the AC has the ability to affect change better. And if you have a problem with an AC, you can plead your case to the other ACs. If something really gets to the point where (this is extreme, but I am trying to address your concerns) an AC just tells you to p!ss off, they could potentially find themselves the center of a vote of No Confidence.

The last thing you mentioned is transparency. IMO the Secretary would release minutes or a summary of monthly votes, including how the ACs voted and any highlights of the discussion.

Not perfect, I know. But this system does create a volunteer committee that is exactly 1 level deep. Anything past that and you are headed for the bureaucracy E&C was warning against earlier.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

I think if we struggled to keep 3 netERC members active, we'll never get 5.

Honestly I think a more informal system is the way forward.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

I'm of the opinion that the current system can work, so long as the people on it have the time to devote to it. That's the crux.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Agreed. Things would also need to be focussed and organised, but I agree that the system is not unfixable.

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.

zombocom
The idea with five NetERC members was that it doesn't matter if 60% of them are inactive at any one time - two plus a quorum of ACs can do the job. The hope was also that spreading the workload wider would result in less burnout and inactivity (since the position would have somewhat less responsibility than before, there would be more people in the position, and no one would be an AC and a NetERC member).

I could certainly name five people who could do the job (including those who currently are, obviously). The question is whether there are five people who would.

Moscovian

I'm pondering what you said.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

I don't think it really matters all that much which of the above proposed systems is used, as long as it consists of:

a) people that are willing and able to put the time and effort in
b) it is sufficiently robust that losing one or two members for whatever reason doesn't cripple the system
c) problems (absent ACs for example) are fixed quickly and openly.

Another thing that I think is essential to that process is to stop sniping at each other. It's easy to put opinions into words in a way that is positive and moves things forward, yet I keep seeing digs at other members even when it doesn't help the discussion. Keep it civil and mature guys.

Moscovian
Almost any system is quick to put together, since no reasonable system will require finding that many people (or really require 100% staffing). Any system that makes use of the people currently here will work OK from an implementation perspective.

I don't think the system I propose would necessarily lead to some sort of democratic revolution where unqualified folk were swept into office on the backs of populist posturing.

Not that that wouldn't be cool, mind you. I could wave a pitchfork. But I'm not talking about elections.

The NetERC system has, in my view, a number of strengths:
1) It concentrates decision-making for major community projects.
2) It creates a group of people who are perceived as being above the usual disputes of a forum and who are seen with a certain gravitas and experience.
3) It minimizes complaints about old-boyedness by confining its membership to the people in group #2, while maximizing OBC's effectiveness by creating an expectation that only that sort of person will get the role.
4) It's the system that was set up semi-officially, and thus is convenient for dealing with Games Workshop and with other communities.

To me, we should hang onto those as tight as we can.

I don't think the Army Champions are viewed in the same way, mostly because the position hasn't seemed to entail that much outside the appropriate subforum. That's not a bad thing, and it's not to say they're not nice guys who are good at their jobs, but I think it's not inaccurate. They're perceived more as ordinary community members than NetERC members, I think. There's also the fact that Army Champions, by virtue of their positions, get into disagreements with other community members a lot more (which is not a bad thing, mind you). I think it's a good thing to have the senior decision-making body be separate from that where possible - having newbies toddle in, disagree with the AC, then dismiss the whole thing as an OBC seems a lot more likely if the senior body IS the ACs.

As someone said, the NetEA gets/got most of its authority from Neal's personal prestige. If neal is gone, I think an important thing to do is to minimize any other changes so that legitimacy is not lost. I'd actually advocate sticking with the current system, except for the fact that it seems to be at least partially failing.

The thing to do, to me, is to download some responsibilities onto the Army Champions while expanding the NetERC. Hopefully, that would reduce the workload such that the NetERC would see less burnout and turnover, while also making the role of Army Champion more meaty (not that it needs it in some cases - but not all races are equally busy), but still keeping the system similar enough that it's more-or-less business as usual. I do think it's important to retain the NetERC, for the reasons above.

SK

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

Going with a Quorum would require virtually no work at all. We have most of the positions filled already. Chroma is the only one that I know of that is missing. (Jaldon isn't missing, just overseas again - he'll be back in a month I think).

I'm fine with the NetERC set-up. However finding somebody who
A) Has the free time
B) Has the knowledge base of the rules
C) Has the organizational skills

...is difficult enough. I think quite highly of myself (just ask my regular opponents :p) and I don't meet the qualifications. I could get by in a pinch but honestly I'd burn out in a year or less. We keep saying that the NetERC can spread out the work to other people. Which other people? The obvious answer are the ACs (which you would have doing the work in a Quorum anyway). And I just don't like what this structure does to the NetERC folks (I'm talking major burnout). They are still the end of the line on rules, updates, lists, erratas, and so on. When something doesn't get done, they get this:
BUMP Where is it?
BUMP It's been 3 months now. What is going on with X?
BUMP Still waiting!

People get annoyed, and rightly so. But that is a lot to dump on three people (even five people). If you can find them, go for it, but I think we will be hard pressed to get better productivity & quality out of the next batch than we had with the first. Even if we don't go with the structure I suggested, something better change or you are beating a dead horse.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

It might not require much work. But once the NetERC's gone, it's gone. Even if a lot of the workload moves to the ACs (and the rest of the community), I think it's worth keeping the NetERC because of the aforementioned advantages. Silly though it sounds, they represent a lot of things, and ditching that will cost us something.

Keep in mind - I'm not expecting they do as much work as they have been. To paraphrase Shogun Total War, I think they should be "freed from the distractions of day-to-day power". But I think having them as a policy-setting organization that resolves larger rules issues would be very valuable.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

I liked you better when you carried a pitchfork.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

I'm hiding it behind my back.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

just a note - the UN meeting I was at a few days ago involved less discussion of planning committee organisation.

gent's, this is getting ridiculous.

I'm leaning towards Sk's line of reasoning - the bulk of the work should be going on at AC level, or indepentant volunteers (like calls for proof reading ect).
netERC are for decisions that are larger then an armybook.

And since they're enthusiastic volunteers, perhaps someone should watch them to make sure they don't burn themselves out.

Yep, someone must step up and say - "This is how it's going to be" and call for people to help fill in positions. Is there no one left on the ERC who can cast around for new members? This is perhaps the greatest failing of the ERC, that they have neglected to recruit replacements for their own circle. This might be one of the reasons its been seen as an Old Boy's Club - the lack of new blood and recurring absenteeism.

_________________
"Don't use finesse, if force will solve the problem."

- Lieutenant General Michael O'Neal

I've finally caught up with all of this, and I have to say it's all getting a bit muddled, and there seem to be far too many proposals going back and forth without too much of a clear idea about how this is actually going to work.

I really don't think that it's up to all of us regular members to make this decision. I think that those responsible for Epic development over the years, and those who are at the top of the chain of command so to speak need to sit down and decide how it's going to work (the NetERC that is), then post a new sticky which outlines how it will work, and the commitment and experience which is required for the job, and then ask people to apply for positions via PM stating why they feel they are suited to the job.

In other words, it becomes a bit like applying for a job. We, as in the regular members, don't write out how it's going to work for a regular job, so why do we need to here? Direction is needed from the top on this one, otherwise it becomes something of a rudderless ship trying to dock in a hurricane force twelve storm.

Now, I can already envisage comments along the lines of 'but a lot of people at the top have left, and this is the problem'. Yes, this is true, but having looked through the forum in some detail, there are multiple army champions, there is an Epic moderator team, and there is no reason why recently retired members of the NetERC can't have input into this if they wish, so why don't these groups get together with Cyber Shadow, hammer out a detailed proposal of how this will work, post it as a sticky, ask for applicants, and take it from there?

_________________