I think you've outlined the structure well enough, but what are your intentions on how to go about filling it CS? Both where existing NetERC members are being seated and how the three additional members will be appointed?

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

I assume that the NetERC as a whole will still vote on rules issues (so the Army Rules guy won't make all decisions for the main rulebook by himself)?

The tournaments guy could also be responsible for the creation and maintenance of a tournament pack, which would include the necessary stuff to run a NetEA event.

I'd assume Chroma would be either Chair or Xenos, and Mephiston either Chair or Rules. I doubt neal would be willing to come back as chair, though I think the workload might be reduced in this structure, so he might (please, neal? We miss you...).

Any thoughts for who else or the process by which the who else will appear?

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

Dave: First and foremost, we need to appoint the Chair. Once this is done, they will take suggestions from the community to appoint the other NetERC members. I would suggest that the relevant ACs assist in the two army NetERC members, working with the Chair.

To appoint a Chair, we have a couple of options:
- totally open ballot
- one of the two current NetERC members
- appointed directly by an individual (nealhunt, for example as his successor)

_________________
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.

I really, really think you're overcomplicating the structure.

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

I'm in favor of appointment first, followed by the existing chairs option. Not really keen on an open ballot given how open registration is on the forum.

I think Neal's respected enough in the community for us to abide who he appoints, and also see it as a tip of the hat for all his work and effort.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Quite possibly. However, in the past we have been just complicated enough to result in confusion, but not quite complicated enough to be entirely organised. I am hoping that with a bit of clear outlining at this stage, people will know where they stand and be able to just get on with things. If everyone knows what they are supposed to do, who they 'report' to and what their responsibilities are, it becomes easier.

In reality, it will be something like the Chair setting a couple of goals, and the NetERC discussing with their small groups and getting stuff done.

_________________
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.

I just don't see you finding that many people willing and able to do the jobs. We've struggled to keep 3, you think 5 will be easier?

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

Thanks C/S for taking the time to go through the whole feedback process and then summarising it all succintly.

Like Dave I am not a fan of open ballot. Either of the other options are fine with me.

Thanks

James

I thought that the problem with 3 is that the workload, for what is after all just a hobby for us, was too heavy leading to burn out and hence difficulty of filling the 3 posts.

By spreading the workload and giving a bit of a safety net if 1 person is off for any time, then should make easier to fill.

Cheers

James

I don't think that was the problem, more that people naturally have life issues that make volunteering to help write rules for toy soldiers drop down their list of priorities.

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

I agree. But the idea here is to not only increase the number of members so that the group can cope with one or two being absent, but to also clearly state who would cover if/when they are, and to give each NetERC member a small team to spread the work and get the community more involved at the same time. I admit that this is one of doing it, and that there may be disagreements about whether it will work, but that's the intention.

_________________
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.

This is my concern as well, and the reason why I suggested the ACs form the NetERC instead. The personnel are already in place and it is a large enough body to police its own. However, this suggestion was not well received. I guess we'll see how this new structure goes.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

Personally, I don't like quota representation. I'm not sure anything will really be gained, and I think anything that unnecessarily limits the pool of potential NetERC members is to be avoided.

Plus, the Australia/Pacific region would seem to have a potential (and actual) player base smaller than either North America or Europe. By a lot.

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

Agree with this. Quotas tend to cause at least as many problems as not.


Potential player base? Definitely.
Actual player base? Probably.
Active board participation and ability to contribute? Completely disagree.

And I'm not just talking about Dobbsy and Frogbear. We've got New Zealanders, and (at least had), Perthicans and Queenswelshmen.

However, to my first point, if the NetERC were to want to go into Tournament Organization (was suggested earlier in the thread), and the like, having regional members of the NetERC would lend some credence to a "global" network, rather than the more insular groups like Epic UK and Epic France.

Morgan Vening