Linus
Star
Life is complex; it has both real and imaginary components
Posts: 614
|
Post by Linus on Apr 3, 2010 15:00:25 GMT -5
The first eleven triads worked out to different extent, and four triads failed, and often it was about one or two members of the triad not participating and causing it to come to a standstill.
Since this was recurring, and that there is a risk that it will happen again (with the creation of new triads being in the making in mind), I think we should come up with a way to "refill" triads, instead of discarding those who are struggling just like that. If one or two members of a triad finds that one or two of their triad members isn't participating, they should be able to somehow ask for new users to fill the empty space. This could for example be solved through a sticky thread on the Triads board, where struggling triads can report things of the like I mentioned and get help refilling empty spaces.
As Dan said in his latest Pogotok, the Triad process should be ever self-improving, and I think this is something that will make the whole process more dynamic. People that actually tried to make their triad work also won't necessarily have to start all over again, which is good in the long run (more working triads = more awesome). Otherwise we might lose members with potential to disappointment from failing, and we will also avoid frustration. It will basically make it move more fluently.
|
|
|
Post by Johncoyne on Apr 3, 2010 15:01:54 GMT -5
I think that it would work if the people whose triad failed were guaranteed a spot in the next cycle. That's a tricky one, though.
|
|
|
Post by speakmouthwords on Apr 3, 2010 15:05:28 GMT -5
I'm not happy with the dynamics of refilling, it means 2 of the relationships have to start from the ground up whilst one is already strong. Could cause awkwardness for the refillee.
|
|
|
Post by Johncoyne on Apr 3, 2010 15:09:43 GMT -5
That's what I was thinking.
|
|
Linus
Star
Life is complex; it has both real and imaginary components
Posts: 614
|
Post by Linus on Apr 3, 2010 15:11:34 GMT -5
I'm not happy with the dynamics of refilling, it means 2 of the relationships have to start from the ground up whilst one is already strong. Could cause awkwardness for the refillee. That is true but if the case is that only one isn't participating, the two others might have something going, and the new person could jump right in. I think it is important that we try to keep triads working, if there's people in the triad wanting it to work, instead of them failing and having to start over again (if this happens many times, people might get frustrated and in the end not wanting to participate, whilst having good potential), and that that will smoothen the process.
|
|
RabbitWho
Star
Rebecca - How 'bout we all put or real names somewhere in our signatures or titles? [SKB:]
Posts: 808
|
Post by RabbitWho on Apr 3, 2010 15:16:13 GMT -5
Randy Pausch Last Lecture: Achieving Your Childhood Dreams: www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji5_MqicxSoHe taught a college course with an amazing marking scheme based on peer-review on how easy you are to work with. Go to 0:51:15 of that video and he explains it. Could something similar be adapted here? (Whole video is worth watching, amazing story)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2010 15:52:52 GMT -5
@rabbit: I think that would be a great idea, but it's also quite dangerous, as it could easily cause a lot of people getting hurt by this. You'd have to have a survey that has a lot of depth and detail. so = a lot of work, but I think it would pay off in general As for the idea of refilling triads, I don't think it's a good idea. 1) It could indeed be really awkward for the new member 2) If one person isn't active, that means the whole triad failed, so apparently did the 2 remaining people, and it might be better to start from scratch (it probably is) 3) You don't HAVE to be in a Triad to start projects.. if you want to start a project with a certain person, just do so
|
|
|
Post by speakmouthwords on Apr 3, 2010 15:52:59 GMT -5
My gut says the other person wouldn't be able to jump right in. Instead of having a "siblings" relationship you may end up having a "parents and child" relationship, at least at first.
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Apr 3, 2010 15:56:42 GMT -5
I don't think "refilling" any triad would be good. Mostly for the arguments about ground-up relationship building.
I do like guaranteeing failed triads entry into the next round, though.
I really think we need to stick to the exact rules from our triad trials.
|
|
Felix
Meteor
I think I lost my headache.
Posts: 85
|
Post by Felix on Apr 3, 2010 15:58:41 GMT -5
i think the refilling thing is a pretty good idea although one member of the triad is kind of an outcast at first, at least the project doesn't just fall through.
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Apr 3, 2010 16:05:44 GMT -5
Oh yeah, totally forgot one comment.
I think lots of triads would succeed if they were given a bit longer to establish themselves.
I think some triads that failed did so because a member was sick/away for about a week and that's pretty much all the time we had to be "in" or "out."
|
|
Cortney
Star
[AWD:0c15]The Objectioner
The Bown
Posts: 885
|
Post by Cortney on Apr 3, 2010 16:14:46 GMT -5
Alright guys, if one member of the triad is failing to do their part, then it is the responsibility of the other two triad members to MAKE the third member pull their weight. If they can't do that, the triad as a whole has failed and will start over. Giving priority to these members when making new triads sounds fine to me, though.
If two of the members failed, the triad would have to be completely restart for that one member anyway, so there would be no point in talking about it. ;P
|
|
Linus
Star
Life is complex; it has both real and imaginary components
Posts: 614
|
Post by Linus on Apr 3, 2010 19:01:28 GMT -5
Okay, you all have valid points.
Maybe it is best to try implement some sort of priority system instead, as you've been saying, for active users that for some reason gets into triads that eventually fail due to someone not participating.
How would that work? Should it be some sort of report system?
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Apr 3, 2010 19:04:00 GMT -5
If we use a form and Google Docs (like I did for PogoPals) such a task would be insanely easy. As easy as working with a spreadsheet.
We could use color-coding or spatial methods to differentiate.
|
|
|
Post by Johncoyne on Apr 3, 2010 19:15:11 GMT -5
I think it would be easiest if it went down like this:
Triad fails-the triad sits out for this round Next round- the members of the triad are guaranteed a spot, but in a different triad. If a member fails three times, s/he is no longer guaranteed a spot.
|
|
Gesh
Planet
Mishap Molly Cordell
Posts: 453
|
Post by Gesh on Apr 3, 2010 19:18:06 GMT -5
I think it would be easiest if it went down like this: Triad fails-the triad sits out for this round Next round- the members of the triad are guaranteed a spot, but in a different triad. If a member fails three times, s/he is no longer guaranteed a spot. That sounds good to me. But when you say a member fails three times, do you mean the person who stops being active in their triad, or are you including the other people in the Triad as failures in that statement (if that makes sense)?
|
|
|
Post by speakmouthwords on Apr 3, 2010 19:18:32 GMT -5
Spacial methods please, but if colour-coding is necessary can they be very different colours? Colourblindness is common especially in me =]
|
|
|
Post by Johncoyne on Apr 3, 2010 19:19:21 GMT -5
If an individual fails 3 times, they are no longer guaranteed a spot. They can try again, but it's not guaranteed they'll get in.
|
|
Gesh
Planet
Mishap Molly Cordell
Posts: 453
|
Post by Gesh on Apr 3, 2010 19:22:23 GMT -5
Okay, so let's say a triad fails because one of their members fails to be active. But according to what Dan and the other admins have said, that means you all failed, because the other two members had a job to make sure that one member did their part. So, in your proposal Conjoin Music, are you referring to a "failing individual" as being only the inactive member? Or all three members?
|
|
|
Post by Johncoyne on Apr 3, 2010 19:24:01 GMT -5
All three members would have failed. I personally don't agree with that, but the admins and Dan seem pretty solid about it.
|
|