|
|
Post by Ferrrrrre on Apr 15, 2010 13:14:00 GMT -5
So after a first batch of triads, there were some triads who needed to drop out because one or more members weren't active or due other problems..
(Yes, I was in one of the triads needed to drop out..)
and now we're having a second batch of triads..
And currently we're having a problem in our own triad; one of the members hasn't responded yet so it's just the two of us (me and metallica210) and I went to check his profile and noticed that
*he registered, posted I want to volunteer in the triad volunteering thread and then has never been online..
So I'm having a double feeling about people who've said that the other should do everything they can to maintain a triad instead of a duo.. but maybe we need to check the persons who have applied to the triad project since I guess most people really like it and wanne get involved in the triad matter but can't because of such problems...
So firstly I'm asking what we (metallica210 and I) need to do; btw the deadline for the triads to get to know each other is tomorrow so I don't know if the third person would be online by then (let's hope so... =( )
and secondly what could we do to prevent this (unless this is all part of dan's plan.. then I guess it wouldn't matter for now...)
|
|
|
|
Post by RorySBarnes on Apr 15, 2010 13:23:15 GMT -5
I think not being able to replace members of your triad is a pretty stupid idea, to be honest. I mean, if a large amount of people sign up, and one or two people drop out, then can't one of the people who didn't get picked be a part of one as a replacement? If they were at all more dedicated than the person who couldn't be bothered to show up at all, then they'd be able to get up to speed with what they were working on, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Apr 15, 2010 13:33:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by RorySBarnes on Apr 15, 2010 13:45:00 GMT -5
I still think it's quite unfair in Ferre's case. It's the second triad he's been in, and the second one that's had to leave because of one person being selfish. Can't you guys make an exception?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ferrrrrre on Apr 15, 2010 13:45:18 GMT -5
I did  but I just find it kinda stupid we need to drop out because the third member didn't the two others need to drop out so I asked if maybe some things should be changed since I heard a lot of people disagreed on that one but didn't really post it.. |
|
|
|
Post by UnfairBear on Apr 15, 2010 13:45:49 GMT -5
This happened to us too. Boo. Really really boo.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Apr 15, 2010 13:49:01 GMT -5
I still think it's quite unfair in Ferre's case. It's the second triad he's been in, and the second one that's had to leave because of one person being selfish. Can't you guys make an exception? If we did that now, we'd have to do it for everyone. Also, it would set a precedent that if you volunteer for triads, you don't even have to show up because we'll just reshuffle them. We definitely don't want that. We only want 100% committed people to sign up. |
|
|
|
Post by RorySBarnes on Apr 15, 2010 13:50:23 GMT -5
But what about people who are 100% commited who sign up who DONT get picked, when there are obviously lots of us, and the places are given to people who don't even SHOW UP. There would be plenty enough people who'd be able to replace them, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by click3tyclick on Apr 15, 2010 13:51:11 GMT -5
I still think it's quite unfair in Ferre's case. It's the second triad he's been in, and the second one that's had to leave because of one person being selfish. Can't you guys make an exception? If we did that now, we'd have to do it for everyone. Also, it would set a precedent that if you volunteer for triads, you don't even have to show up because we'll just reshuffle them. We definitely don't want that. We only want 100% committed people to sign up. But there will always be idiots. And I'm sorry for being blunt, but someone who comes to the triad volunteering thread, volunteers, and then doesn't even come back online is nothing but an idiot. Unless there's some kind of problem right when they had to become active. Which is highly unlikely. |
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Apr 15, 2010 13:53:26 GMT -5
But what about people who are 100% commited who sign up who DONT get picked, when there are obviously lots of us, and the places are given to people who don't even SHOW UP. There would be plenty enough people who'd be able to replace them, right? Sure, but that's the point. We want all volunteers to be 100% committed all the way through the process. We didn't realize that some people signing up would become inactive. We couldn't predict that and we can never predict that. The most important parts of creating triads are getting people who will stick around and are 100% committed as well as maintaining as much randomization as possible. |
|
|
|
Post by Ferrrrrre on Apr 15, 2010 13:58:18 GMT -5
But what about people who are 100% commited who sign up who DONT get picked, when there are obviously lots of us, and the places are given to people who don't even SHOW UP. There would be plenty enough people who'd be able to replace them, right? Sure, but that's the point. We want all volunteers to be 100% committed all the way through the process. We didn't realize that some people signing up would become inactive. We couldn't predict that and we can never predict that. The most important parts of creating triads are getting people who will stick around and are 100% committed as well as maintaining as much randomization as possible. Yeah, I understand.. I guess I just needed to get this out and needed to ask if there could be any other way to deal with these "problems" since this was the first time I got into this problem of 1 member not responding and I was - and still am - pretty excited about the whole triad concept but oh yeah?... [/rant] |
|
|
|
Post by bombmaniac on Apr 15, 2010 14:00:04 GMT -5
i am inclined to agree with ferre...but ill leave that for the discussion we will have tonight
|
|
|
|
Post by RorySBarnes on Apr 15, 2010 14:01:22 GMT -5
Then pick a name out of a hat when picking replacements.  |
|
|
|
Post by chelseeyuh on Apr 15, 2010 15:16:00 GMT -5
We're sorry that this happened, and we really wish that we could have prevented it, but there really was/is nothing we can do.
We decided not to replace members because there were a few cases where members did not log on within the first few days of the triads being announced, but then after 4 or so days got on and realized they were in a triad, and got involved. It wouldn't have been fair for them to log on, see that they're in a triad, and then see that they were replaced because they hadn't responded right away.
Also, if we had to replace inactive members, we would have had to extend the deadline, and this wouldn't be fair to triads who met the deadline and are eager to move on to the next step of the process.
When we started the triads, we did not know that we had FULL control, and therefore could have taken measures to prevent this from happening. We are more than willing to help the group of successful triads through their process and see that they tae measures to prevent this from happening again.
|
|
Yokailo
Star
[AWD:020307]
I like things.
Posts: 734
|
Post by Yokailo on Apr 15, 2010 15:18:01 GMT -5
In my case, the member (two members, I was one as well) actually did have a good reason not to be online for this one week. The double thing about deadlines is that they make people work harder, but also, if the timing is just really bad, it makes three people fail. And I know failure isn't bad, it still feels like a failure and having to go through the whole selection-process without knowing whether you will be in next time isn't fun. Then pick a name out of a hat when picking replacements. That sounds like a good idea.. It's still random. But the danger with that is, I think, that people might go "oh well, I might as well sign up, take a look for a couple of days and then leave again, they'll get a new member anyway". |
|
|
|
Post by Ferrrrrre on Apr 15, 2010 15:20:27 GMT -5
In my case, the member (two members, I was one as well) But the danger with that is, I think, that people might go "oh well, I might as well sign up, take a look for a couple of days and then leave again, they'll get a new member anyway". Well.. I guess that has happened to us.. (okay, it could be that the member has a VERY GOOD reasonf for not being online but I still hope then we'll get to know why..) So yeah, I'll guess we'll have to drop out for this round? *sigh* |
|
|
|
Post by Benyamin on Apr 15, 2010 19:15:07 GMT -5
I think the Selectors should send out a pm to everyone who volunteered and anyone who doesn't respond within a day or two is replaced. They should also state this in the OP.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Apr 15, 2010 19:18:16 GMT -5
I think the Selectors should send out a pm to everyone who volunteered and anyone who doesn't respond within a day or two is replaced. They should also state this in the OP. That's not a bad idea right there. |
|
|
|
Post by UnfairBear on Apr 16, 2010 8:26:43 GMT -5
I think the Selectors should send out a pm to everyone who volunteered and anyone who doesn't respond within a day or two is replaced. They should also state this in the OP. Lol you and me posted this idea literally a minute apart in two different threads. We must have some crazy mental connection =P |
|
|
|
Post by AMagicalCat on Apr 16, 2010 9:56:14 GMT -5
What about making it a little bit harder to volunteer? It's too easy to see a thread and write "I volunteer" and then never come back. But if you have to send someone a PM (maybe making an account just to recieve volunteers) with some simple facts about yourself. ex:
Name: (maybe only the first name(?))
Username:
Mail and/or Skype:
Have you understood what you are volunteering for and are you 100% committed to follow trough this process until it's finished? (yes/no)
This would make people think twice about volunteering.. and if they include mail and/or skype it would be easier to contact them if they forget.
|
|
#cookies.. 
