Newsletter Interviews

[iancudorinmarian]

I want to see a change in the way newsletter interviews are chosen, because the current system doesn't seem very effective to me. We either get people that don't really care about the interview or people that are too new for others to really care to ask questions. And there's also the fact that even if some people have been promised interviews, they get delayed for too long.

I suggest that at the start of every month we should have a 5 day window in which people can suggest names of people they want to see interviewed. The conditions for a person to be able to be chosen for this is that that person did not have an interview in the last 2-3 years (the period is up to debate). After this period of 5 days, there should be 5 days in which people can vote for the people suggested, a poll should be created for this. Then, another ~10 days for sending the questions.

I'm looking forward to seeing what other people suggest for this.

[TheonlyrealBeef]

Regardless of anything else: a promise is a promise, I don't think anyone is too concerned about not being interviewed within short time, but then don't say the opposite either. Once person x is next to be interviewed, person x is next to be interviewed. Period. End of story.

For interviewees, it may indeed be interesting to let the ones reading these interviews decide whom is to be interviewed, no? There is currently zero transparency on how the selection is done, which may well be the greatest fault of the current process. Just having a neat ordered list of interviewees that have been decided goes a long way. Organizing this list based on a poll seems about right, but holding one each month gets tiresome for everyone. Nominate people, put them in a poll, and then pick the top 3-4 and add them to the list of interviewees for the next 3-4 months.

[Manuel]

i wanna ask only one thing, not related to the interviews, so i will use this thread

in the last few months all the decks where made by masters, instead isn't better get the decks from the "post deck ideas here" section, and then, if all the decks are really, really bad, ask to a master or a deck helper for a deck?

nobody post decks because is hard be original, but even because there is no sense in posting a deck; with the incentive of be in the newsletter, probably more decks will be posted

about the nl thing: is too hard interview two guys at once? just make an interview with a newbie (<500 post or something similar) at the one with a veteran: in this way, even newbies can understand how much they are important for the community.

[dark ripper]

i wanna ask only one thing, not related to the interviews, so i will use this thread

in the last few months all the decks where made by masters, instead isn't better get the decks from the "post deck ideas here" section, and then, if all the decks are really, really bad, ask to a master or a deck helper for a deck?

nobody post decks because is hard be original, but even because there is no sense in posting a deck; with the incentive of be in the newsletter, probably more decks will be posted

there have been a lot of talks on this matter. First of all, most if all the decks in the deck ideas section are either straight up bad or already used ideas. There have been suggestions to make themed DiotMs. They just have not been realized yet. I dont know how the discussion between the NL writers is going, but there have been a lot of suggestions on the matter.

[Submachine]

about the nl thing: is too hard interview two guys at once? just make an interview with a newbie (<500 post or something similar) at the one with a veteran: in this way, even newbies can understand how much they are important for the community.

There's no point of interviewing a newbie, because the readers most likely won't be interested. As I see, the interviewed people are usually popular people who have a lot of experience with the forum that they can share and what the readers can relate with. When we run out of people who are well-known enough, that's the point when there should be no interview, rather than interviewing a newcomer.

  Just my two cents.

Also I have no idea who's idea was to interview kinkykitten. She might be friendly and a nice person, but she sure didn't do enough on this forum to earn it. I smell bias.

[Manuel]

There's no point of interviewing a newbie, because the readers most likely won't be interested. As I see, the interviewed people are usually popular people who have a lot of experience with the forum that they can share and what the readers can relate with. When we run out of people who are well-known enough, that's the point when there should be no interview, rather than interviewing a newcomer.

  Just my two cents.

Also I have no idea who's idea was to interview kinkykitten. She might be friendly and a nice person, but she sure didn't do enough on this forum to earn it. I smell bias.

i've used the word newbie at random probably, i don't think a player with less than 500 is supposed to be a newcomer, for exampe i think everyone will read with pleasure an interview to chrispy or to baseman: they aren't newbies, they aren't popular like a master or a veteran but no one can say they aren't part of this community

[dark ripper]

There's no point of interviewing a newbie, because the readers most likely won't be interested. As I see, the interviewed people are usually popular people who have a lot of experience with the forum that they can share and what the readers can relate with. When we run out of people who are well-known enough, that's the point when there should be no interview, rather than interviewing a newcomer.

  Just my two cents.

Also I have no idea who's idea was to interview kinkykitten. She might be friendly and a nice person, but she sure didn't do enough on this forum to earn it. I smell bias.

i've used the word newbie at random probably, i don't think a player with less than 500 is supposed to be a newcomer, for exampe i think everyone will read with pleasure an interview to chrispy or to baseman: they aren't newbies, they aren't popular like a master or a veteran but no one can say they aren't part of this community

Indeed. However. If we do 2 interviews per month and one of them is an upcoming and promising member, we lose that interview later. Wouldnt it be better to let some time pass and interview them when they have more time and experience in the forums?

[CCCombobreaker]

Ian,

Let me address the 2 issues here.

First:

I'd like Discord to be more open to feedback (in general, not talking about this particular scenario), because currently, she only replies to positive feedback, and tries to defend herself against negative feedback, sometime even by insulting the one that sent that feedback.

I went to look at how the conversation started

[2016-09-06 00:01:22] iancudorinmarian: I'm very disappointed in you, Discord.
[2016-09-06 00:01:39] Discord: ‹@iancudorinmarian› what
[2016-09-06 00:01:41] iancudorinmarian: Your way of choosing which people to interview is really stupid.

You and Discord have a complicated, usually playful, relationship in the game/chat and when you lead off acting informal and a little condescending ("disappointed", "really stupid") you are not clearly trying to start a professional sounding discussion where you are giving constructive feedback and she can respond that she will or won't consider that feedback.  You are attacking her value and her competency and did not even directly address the actual issue (that you would like her to follow up on her interview promises in a timely manner) until after she already feels threatened.  Obviously she gets defensive, that is a very normal response to being attacked.  When you lead off a conversation like this, and then the other person gets defensive, you are unfairly holding them to a higher standard than you are holding yourself.  Some people can take this sort of put down and still give you a calm reasoned professional response, but expecting that is unreasonable. 

Second:

The NL writing team puts in a significant amount of time and energy and for a long time has been very disorganized, which really increases the time an energy required (or quality of the NL) in adverse ways (which is also compounded by the main NL writer also trying to General a team in War).  Per a recent discussion with Discord (prior to this thread) they don't even have a post that lists all previous DIotM and CIotM for them to reference to avoid repeats.  I'm guessing that there is also no record of who has been interviewed and when. 

The newsletter is a service to the community provided by volunteers, and when volunteers do a bad job at something, it usually means they need help.  If you insult or berate people who volunteer (or their work) they quit, which has been a chronic problem here on EtG (and in any other volunteer organization, of which I have worked with many).  We want nice things, people volunteer to do them, others in the community harass or insult them and then they leave because why work for free and get angry or hurt over it.  If you want people to stay and keep volunteering to do things like be a NL, and you see they are doing a bad job, try asking how you can help. 

I'm sure if some people pitched in to help organize a history of important NL columns (CIotM, DIotM, Interviews) it will save the NL writers time and energy they can use to better do other parts of the job.  Maybe add another NL staff during wars to help split up the work better since it is a busy time for most of the community. 

Ultimately we all want a nice newsletter, we want people to keep their promises, and we don't want people to get burned out and quit.  The best way to achieve all those things is to ask them if they need help, have people step in to do little things to make it easier, and to precede any feedback with a thank you.

[iancudorinmarian]

I have stated in that very quote that I am not talking about this particular incident.

And yes, I have not been very nice to begin with. But I kept not saying anything about all this and at that moment I simply couldn't stand anymore.

[Calindu]

Per a recent discussion with Discord (prior to this thread) they don't even have a post that lists all previous DIotM and CIotM for them to reference to avoid repeats.  I'm guessing that there is also no record of who has been interviewed and when. 

DIotM
CIotM
Featured Community Member

They have all those lists well organised, just that they haven't updated them in the last months.

Also I agree with what has been said so far, be open for suggestions, take advantage of the poll system to not only give you ideas for DIotM and CIotM, but to also avoid any potential problems with badly chosen decks, cards or members, and you'll have a much easier job.

[Solaris]

I suggest to integrate a poll system for interviews. 7 days to collect candidates, 7 days to vote on the candidate, 7 days to collect questions, 7 days for the interviewee to answer the questions. Can be shortened as needed. If the community picks the interviewee, the community cannot reasonably get upset about the community, since the candidate will be "generally" agreed upon.

[CCCombobreaker]

DIotM
CIotM
Featured Community Member

Duly noted, although I will say the format for that list could be better, names or key cards in the spoiler title could greatly reduce the number of times those spoiler tags all have to be clicked to verify a deck or card has not been used before.

The Community member list is great in that respect, but if we want a time limit on when a person can be re-featured, having the dates by the names in the list would be helpful.

I can look into do a little of that research/formatting later this week to help out a little.

I have stated in that very quote that I am not talking about this particular incident.

And yes, I have not been very nice to begin with. But I kept not saying anything about all this and at that moment I simply couldn't stand anymore.

My apologies for misjudging some of the context.  I appreciate that you still understood my main point.  This situation did not bring out the best in either you or Discord, and I just want to emphasize the value you both bring to the community (and your friendship) so that it is not lost when people come to this post and see this one conversation. 

I suggest to integrate a poll system for interviews. 7 days to collect candidates, 7 days to vote on the candidate, 7 days to collect questions, 7 days for the interviewee to answer the questions. Can be shortened as needed. If the community picks the interviewee, the community cannot reasonably get upset about the community, since the candidate will be "generally" agreed upon.

This is a great idea, but it is adding additional (routine and non-writing) work to the NL position.  Which I think warrants considering an increase in NL staff.  Maybe 2 writers and 1 organizer (editor?) is a more appropriate division of NL responsibilities that can also increase the quality and quantity of NL content?