Responsiblity of Leaders

[sasquatch]

Is to make responsible, rational choices, especially when so many hours of work are involved. I am attaching a priority grid to help prioritize good/bad ideas on the basis of urgency and importance. A bad idea would be one that is both unimportant and not urgent (trivial things that undo previous quality work). By reasonably prioritizing both planning and implementation the resources here can be better put to use.

https://www.taylorintime.com/resourcece ... tygrid.jpg

Responsible leadership also shares discussion so that all ideas are able to be equally heard. After one proposal has been thoroughly discussed other ideas that are high on this grid should also be discussed in order of importance and urgency.

Being able to have a productive discussion requires sharing of ideas and accepting criticism. It also requires sharing discussion. Responsible leadership allows all ideas to be heard in turn, with high importance, high urgency topics and ideas being discussed and implemented first.

Responsible leadership also shows proper restraint of power. Due to the size of this project it is understandable that many changes have to be made to allow it to work, but small unnecessary changes and/or major changes should not be made lightly. The more unimportant and not urgent and idea is, the more it needs to be discussed but also with less urgency.

This last matrix shows the relationship between power and responsibility:
http://imgur.com/iuvJvxu

Responsible leadership should understand what is required to to motivate contributors and other leaders. A balanced leadership is required if TR is going to function well. That means sharing responsibility and decision-making and showing this responsibility through action (by following through with duties regardless of status or reward etc).

[Haplo]

I'm not sure what the point of this thread is?

[Worsas]

As far as I understand:
1. is about setting priorities to make best-possible progress. Either by focussing on new content or fixing areas where things are the worst rather than negligible improvements.
2. is about the use of authority in discussions and how they are performed.

Apart from that:

I have read through two of your discussion around here. And I think one problem TR has is that members are not really on a page with each other regarding axioms at TR.

Three axioms of many I learned about are: It is done when it is done (timeframes do not play a role), what is interesting and alien is right (mundane and boring wrong), being consistent with the original game in appearance to a certain degree.

What is with the degree of importance of pseudo-realism, though? Some members seemingly steer very hard towards pseudo-realism while others care more for the atmospheric value of things.

The question of consistency with the Bethesda contents has also become a blurry field, as far as I'm aware. TR has been pursuing their own "compromise" (not sure how to call it) for a while. To a degree everybody creates his own compromise between new designs and old beth-stuff, I guess.

(I know TR has moved away from the idea of doing the mainland as Bethesda would have done it long ago. But where is the center of reference then other than at a certain group of people?)

There are more things that sometimes arise and that are seemingly not really 100% settled.

What I want to say is: You should maybe think through and formulate ways of dealing with certain topics that frequently arise that can act as a solid backbone for discussions and design decisions. Also: What has priority for TR?

Many of the things that are quietly assumed to be present in the minds of people are scattered around the forum and some may not know about them.

I honestly think the two topics Sasquatsch brought should at least be considered around here, if this didn't happen yet. If the answer is already clear though, it only needs to be given.

[Haplo]

Thanks worsas. I think what you mentioned are important things, though they're a bit different than what sasquatch's post seems to be talking about. My question was more directed toward sasquatch and what the purpose for him making the post was

[Worsas]

Yeah, I know that this arose from a fight with Yeti in another thread and

I don't really agree with Sasquatsch's way of trying to authoritatively surpress discussion on a suggestion while critizing the performance of authority by long-established members at the same time.

But if you disregard the concrete circumstances there is still a concrete gist. A priority system and an agenda, not as a means of surpressing talk of something but rather as a way to point attention of people towards the hot zones, if you like it that way.

I know the other province mods are not the best example of amazing progress, but I've been using some kind of priority system for myself when working on them. So I have mostly given stuff priority that needs to be in place before other members can proceed.

It is because I personally hate the idea that a province mod will still take another 20 years before the province reaches finalization. By that time the project will be dead.

Edit:
Should I be wrong on anything, please let me know.

From my experience the question of smooth progress is not merely a matter of priority but also of a creative atmosphere and general motivation/interest.

The static cornerstones in a project should act as a means to avoid conflicts that destroy the motivation of people, if anything.

[immortal_pigs]

I think that something we could take away from this is that we could use a better welcome wagon for new members. Unintentionally, the scattergun spread of information across the forums leads to some members being more up to date than others, which may give the impression of a clique of those "in-the-know". I think that it's safe to assume that most members post with the best of intentions, but that ignorance of information, current priorities or TR social customs can lead to unnecessary situations. Lately a bunch of threads have been popping up offering interesting ideas that just don't happen to fit current priorities. The ideas may be perfeclty fine, they're just offered at the wrong moment. Having a list of current priorities could help members who want to contribute channel their creative resources in a more practical direction.

[Melchior Dahrk]

The ideas may be perfeclty fine, they're just offered at the wrong moment. Having a list of current priorities could help members who want to contribute channel their creative resources in a more practical direction.

Or having a repository of some kind for ideas which may be well suited to draw on at a later time but won't be acted on in the near future.

edit: as far as this discussion goes: my only indication of what's important right now is to see what threads are active at the bottom of the forum: Old Ebonheart, Almalexia, Othrensis (don't actually even know what region this is, lol). Some way to better convey the current state of priorities may be useful.

But I still think that discussions of things which are not a current priority should be facilitated somewhere/somehow. Because what I've seen is that once enough steam is behind a certain direction, it's difficult for TR to change course, even if everyone agrees that there's a better idea of a way to do something. So if things are discussed at length beforehand, perhaps some of these late-change discussions could be minimized.

This is from the viewpoint of someone mostly on the outside.

[Yeti]

Our priorities are the sections you mentioned. If this needs to be further promoted among our developers, it should be.

When it comes to creating a repository of project knowledge to draw on, that's pretty much what the goal of the Master Planning section is.

[Melchior Dahrk]

Our priorities are the sections you mentioned. If this needs to be further promoted among our developers, it should be.

When it comes to creating a repository of project knowledge to draw on, that's pretty much what the goal of the Master Planning section is.

I see it now. Priority items have sub-forums in the "Mod Planning" board. But the "Master Planning" sub-forum being the place to talk about non-priority items is not very clear. When I read "Brainstorming, discussing, and drafting of the Master Plan happens here." I think a non-specific, overhead outline rather than getting into any nitty gritty details. I wouldn't feel in-the-right to post something as simple as "There should be an Imperial fort named Lutemoth!" or "INSERT RANDOM SUGGESTION FOR FUTURE AREA" here, just for example.

Though, it does seem that such ideas should be posted on the "Mod Planning" board. Master Planning just sounds a bit too daunting of a location.

[wollibeebee]

the scattergun spread of information across the forums leads to some members being more up to date than others.

This is really, really true. Yesterday Rot and Swiftoak were talking about their plans for Almas Thirr, Roa Dyr and Andothren. I've explored the mainland esps quite a bit, but I still have no idea where any of these places are, because I'm never "playing" but instead flying around the map looking at random things. I think it would be really good to have comprehensive map (and if there is one, I don't know where it is) that me people can access easily, allowing them to get a grasp of the world which they've joined the team to help create, much faster. I'm quite often PMing Swiftoak - or stalling our conversation - just to ask him where a certain place is, or what a certain acronym means.

A lot of the discussion here assumes you've been at TR for quite some time already, pre-dating the creation of many of the topics currently been discussed.

At this point I'm tempted to make one myself just so that I can follow the IRC chats and forum threads, like I did for P:C: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/236 ... rodiil.jpg and a few other provinces.

[Yeti]

But the "Master Planning" sub-forum being the place to talk about non-priority items is not very clear. When I read "Brainstorming, discussing, and drafting of the Master Plan happens here." I think a non-specific, overhead outline rather than getting into any nitty gritty details.

I'm afraid I might have inadvertently confused you, Melchior. The Master Planning section is where we should be discussing the overhead issues of the mod, such as identifying the nature and character of our factions, planning our regions in grand terms and generally determining what we want our version of Morrowind to be.

I'll quote one of Sload's posts, because I think it describes the purpose of the Master Planning section better than I could.

Tamriel Rebuilt needs a master plan. This plan will be the highest level organizing document for the project, against which all content will be judged to ensure that it is contributing successfully to the whole of Tamriel Rebuilt's goal. This thread is for taking the first steps toward writing that master plan.

I think an effective means of organizing the master plan is the structure which follows.

Preface

§1 - Tamriel Rebuilt's goal and purpose
what are we actually trying to accomplish. what does a "completed TR" look like?

Part I - Worldspace Planning
(Level production; how the mod extends across the game's 3D space)

§2 - Physiographic Worldspace
The physical/natural geography of the project. Mountains, rivers, regions, flora, fauna.

§3 - Anthropographic Worldspace
The cultural/political geography of the project. Faction regions, cities & their scale, roads (major & minor), etc.

§4 - Ludological Worldspace
The gameplay geography of the project. Difficulty levels, dungeon types, etc.

Part II - Storycourse Planning
(Story production; how the mod extends across the game's time length as the player interacts with characters)

Here I am less clear on the breakdown of this part, but I think some of the basic elements of this are:
-determining what role each quest and quest line has in the narrative of the game
-the themes of the questlines
-how their interaction and conflict is sorted out

Part III - Implementing this Plan

What steps do we take to actually reach our goal, now that we have clearly laid it out?

Determining and conceptualizing these guidelines are the highest priority item for our mod. Unfortunately, nearly all of them involve heavy subject matters, making discussing them difficult.

I would have typed out a more thorough post, but I need to run to catch a bus.

[Melchior Dahrk]

This is really, really true. Yesterday Rot and Swiftoak were talking about their plans for Almas Thirr, Roa Dyr and Andothren. I've explored the mainland esps quite a bit, but I still have no idea where any of these places are, because I'm never "playing" but instead flying around the map looking at random things. I think it would be really good to have comprehensive map (and if there is one, I don't know where it is) that me people can access easily, allowing them to get a grasp of the world which they've joined the team to help create, much faster. I'm quite often PMing Swiftoak - or stalling our conversation - just to ask him where a certain place is, or what a certain acronym means.

A lot of the discussion here assumes you've been at TR for quite some time already, pre-dating the creation of many of the topics currently been discussed.

Yes, I think TR could really use something like this.

I'm afraid I might have inadvertently confused you, Melchior. The Master Planning section is where we should be discussing the overhead issues of the mod, such as identifying the nature and character of our factions, planning our regions in grand terms and generally determining what we want our version of Morrowind to be.

Okay, that's what I thought it was before. So, yes, you did confuse me!

I'm not really sure what sparked this thread in the first place, so I'll just bow out for now and let the main concern be dealt with.

[Worsas]

As it sounds to me the Master plan deals with development of content while it does not deal with the principles of collaboration and design at TR which people should know about more than anything.

One thing that has shocked me about TR since the beginning is an almost fierce willingness to trash and remake the work of people (although the current discussions in the master plan reveal a certain tendency towards preferring amendment over complete rework).

People who spend time around TR either grow into the general mindset and the way of approaching things over time or they are put off by the same.

The point of my involvement in this thread was

1. Suggesting Collecting/formulating the main principles of collaboration and design at TR in general terms (abstract, not a list of specifications/laws). This would be especially for new people to read but for the old members too.
2. Possibly reconsidering how TR works in places, which is where I connect to Sasquatsch at the top.


But in your place I would only bother, if you expected an actual use from this, as in a measurable amount of new people that integrate themselves better by knowing about TR better beforehand or discussions that are resolved/led in a fruitful direcion by application of the principles.


Edit: After 10-20 edits of this post I would like to add that none of what I've written above is any way intended as offense against TR.

In fact I have only started to write down some loose thoughts after reading Sasquatschs complaints. And they were not connected to any particular ambition on my part. Another reason why I started to write at all was that I felt safe to do so without causing any trouble for me or anybody around here. But if anything is wrong though, let me know.

[Haplo]

Don't worry, Worsas; if you aren't insulting the project or an individual, then there's no problem Your ideas and concerns are good and relevant to the project so they do merit discussion.