Hello everyone.

You might find it strange that I would have a question about v6. After all, I am the architect. But I do have a question about it. I've been discussing it with a couple of trusted lieutenants and I've decided to finally just ask the people who might actually be using this. But first, here's a little background:

RPG Maker Magazine Version 6 is a completely new concept for RPGMM. After 10 years of being a dedicated RPG Maker site, I have decided to change the focus from this to covering mainstream gaming articles and having a much bigger focus on Let's Plays, which have been a huge part of what we've been doing with our time for years now. RPG Maker itself has not been abandoned. That's going to have a completely redesigned and much-better vault.

However, the backbone of this site is going to be the people who decide to put in time to make gaming and RM-related. In other words, people like you reading this. What I have coined the people who will create these articles is the term Editor. My idea is that every Editor's work will be featured on the front page of the site (like my front page posts, except much nicer looking) and will be paged sort of like what joystiq has.

Here's a couple ways that such a system could work:

1. Open signups for Editors in the opening month of the site. After that, applications, including a writing sample, are voted on by current Editors. 3 Editor votes get you in. Editor process takes a bit longer, but we would more likely than not have quality Editors and the need for a flag system would likely be moot. Current Moderators would likely just be tasked with viewing article comments reported by the new system and editing/deleting them.

2. Anyone who wants to be an Editor only has to sign up on the site and they automatically have the ability to be an Editor and start uploading articles. Editor process would be extremely fast, but anyone would have the ability to post content. This is a good and bad thing. Would definitely necessitate a flag system so that offensive material could be hidden and such. A group of "Super Editors" would be created to take offensive content out of the article lineups for review by admins/other Super Editors.

There might be a third or more that I'm overlooking, so if you have an idea, please share it with me.

But the question is, which of those two would you rather have and why? If you could elaborate on your answer, that would help me a lot. This is a chance to get some of your input into the version of the Mag to set us up for maybe even the next 10 years of site history.

I propose the idea that any new topic or even post within a topic can become a front page article.

Posts could become articles by being simply great posts. A recommendation button could be pressed by any registered viewer which would create a post in an admin only forum linking to the recommended post and showing who recommended it. Each time a single post is recommended by a new viewer, a reply is posted to that thread indicating it has been recommended by the new viewer. Once flagged for front page by an admin, the recommend button is replaced with a front page article indicator. The post would also get a title to be displayed on the front page.

On the front page, there would be no visible replies, but instead a link to the forum post as well as a number indicating the number of replies it has received in the forums. There would be a comment field where some one could post a reply that would go to the forum. If it is made by someone not registered at the forums, there would be a streamlined sign up process where they can make their reply, create a name, submit valid email address and answer a captcha. They would also be automatically subscribed to the topic so that they would be reminded to participate in the forum community.

I vote 1 personally. Anyone can comment, and I notice a bunch of sites post like a special "best of forum today/week!" post on the front page. Having editors not be anyone who just joins should also be able to keep quality content and such. If we're just talking people already on the site- I think anyone here would make a great editor, so my original point would then be moot.

Optionally, of course.

Given the two choices up top, I vote the first solution, where we'd vote someone into being an editor. I wouldn't want this place turning out like GameFAQs. Sure, there'd be moderators to remove articles that don't meet standards, but that would only cause trouble among the folks who put the effort (what poorly made it was) into writing the articles.

Alternatively, if we did allow just anyone to post articles, what we could do is have a rating system in place for them. People reading the articles could give them a thumbs up or thumbs down, and anybody browsing the articles could then use a filter to only show articles that have a certain percentage of thumbs up. But I'm not sure how much extra work that would take on your part, Ix.

No, automatically, of course. They can unsubscribe to it on their next visit now that they are registered, or within the email by clicking unsubscribe. Besides, it needn't send an email for EVERY reply. Just end of the week recaps, like this subscribed topic has received 9 replies this week.

The problem with having the new title of editor is that there really are so few of us that are regular. It can divide. Plus some don't want the pressure of producing content. But on a whim, anyone can make a great post. I'd hate to see it fade away.

Honestly, I just have a bad feeling about the editor solution.

Thanks for the responses so far. I will state again, though, that the two main ideas in the opening post are not the ONLY ways this thing could be done.

Bot, I'm both for and against your idea right now. While your idea of having great posts becoming front page stuff is an interesting idea, there is a toolkit on v6 now that needs to be filled out (which allows for image galleries, video galleries, facebooking, tweeting and more) in order to make these articles much more than just posts from a message board.

That's why I made an announcement to talk about this stuff in the chat on Saturday, too. Dynamic feedback will help this, too.

But let's continue here until then.

I think there needs to be a pressure to produce quality content. I mean, if not, mind as well just have forums. The past works on the site with RPGM were amazing. But the whole "mainstream video game" thing means doin' something. It doesn't have to be as often as Joystiq or anything- they've got a massive team- but yeah. I think content could be anything from game blurbs, reviews, past stuff, to new LP episodes. There will always be something from the LP-side of things alone.

Then, an admin (already a person with responsibility) can fill out the toolkit. Of course, so could the original poster. Really, current admins have it easy. If they want to remain admins, let them make articles from posts by filling out the toolkit. I just don't see the need to create a new position. Eventually, all of us will be wearing not just a few hats, but all the hats.

But... but we could have robin hood hats! But I get what you're saying as well. Perhaps a hybrid could be cool. Any forum topic/poster can make the front page, but we also have some articles produced by several regulars?

Kinda like... uhm... well, the Pav. I know that's probably heated to mention, but I think the whole having notable forum posts also reach the front page is certainly not a bad thing. And I get what you're saying as well with more of a comment integration thing, since we don't have nearly as many members as some place like Joystiq or anything. It'd help to keep things more unified.

That's annoying. They should at least be given the option when they initially sign up.

Touching on something above,



This.

I've for a long time felt that my position is fairly unnecessary. The community simply isn't big enough in its current form to necessitate as many admins as we have.

Staff should be restructured or reassigned in some way unless you foresee a massive gain in membership fairly quickly.

Here's something I was talking about with Lantis and I propose to you all here:

For a period of say, 1 month, we could accept open invitations for people to be Editors.

After this period, we would follow insultobot's method of content generation, with posts being nominated for front page status. After being recognized by the community maybe 5 times for post quality and excellence, that person would be bestowed the title of Editor. These people would then be granted access to the article toolkit and would have the ability to freely create articles that would go into the flow of the main site as a reward for that.

This way, the readers of the site themselves would be the ones to weed out articles for quality and reward the best of us with this prestigious title.

As for v6's admins/mods, I've had plans for a while to shake up that for a while, but since it's been mentioned, I might as well share my thoughts on that, too. Insultobot and Lone are both right. For the size we are, there is too much staff and the staff as it is now doesn't have to work especially hard. But for v6, besides being forum moderators, there would be a need for actual site moderation. So I'm looking to clean out everyone and have them re-apply to be moderators again.

However, this time they would be full site moderators. This is a different position, therefore, we would need people with a different drive. This would be a very serious position on the site with responsibilities of article proof-reading, comment moderation and overall forum moderation. I would likely only look for 3 people for this position in all at the start of the site, with more added gradually if necessary.

Sounds good to me. Sorry for not being more in depth but I don't think I have too much to add at this point. Just so I understand, the posters that become editors in the way you just described only have access to the toolkit and are not in any way moderators, am I correct?

Right. They ONLY have access to the toolkit.

Hey, there's a thing supposed to be going on in the chat right now about talking about v6 plans and suggestions. Ixzion and Lantis are sorta waiting for people to show up. So, show up. =P

Okay guys, Ix is beginning to structure the LP section of the site. What he would really like is some feedback. Since a good few of us LP, he would really like some suggestions for the kind of system that you'd like to see.

I had a few ideas, so I'll run mine through here. First and foremost, we'd need a reason to view your LP here instead of Youtube. There's got to be some system that Youtube doesn't have. Though the system will probably use youtube embeds. The only thing I really see to do is somehow add some way to categorize your LPs. Right now, Youtube has no way to categorize your playlists. So here's my thing:



You will be allowed to create categories. The image above is the categories I would make. Seeing as I have several types of LPs. I'd make one for the LPs I do alone, the LPs I do with other people, and then another for the races.

I'd then add the full LP to those categories. So you'd be able to quickly see all the LPs in each. Clicking on an LP from any of the categories (which in the example is the forth LP in the solo LP category) would load up underneath two things: First would be the embedded playlist from Youtube. Underneath would be a list of all the LPs in that playlist if you wanted to view them individually or visit the youtube page for the comments or whatever.

And finally underneath that would be a comment section so that you can make a comment on the LP as a whole and not individual videos. You'd be able to click the individual videos links to get to the normal youtube comments for that.

It keeps navigation to a minimum as most of it happens on the same page. And it is a way to keep things organized and categorized properly. If you have any suggestions, changes, or entirely different systems, let us know. We really want to make this section shine in V6.

I really don't feel like deciphering what you're trying to say (I'd imagine it'd be easier trying it out than reading an explanation), but yes, I want categories.

You can create categories(aka, 1P LPs, one for your co-op LPs, one for maybe RPGM LPs if desired). Those would be at the top of the mockup, as kind of a basic selector.

Depending on which you click in the top part, you can then select a particular LP from there. Let's say for this, I click the Co-Op category on the Lantis page, and then I select Secret of Evermore.

Next, it'd load in that middle part the Youtube Playlist Video in a huge box, and then have links to all the parts below it.(The game being, Secret of Evermore.)

Instead of having comments for each particular segment of an LP, people can leave comments on the overall LP page. So in this example, if anyone comments while watching any part of the Secret of Evermore LP, it aggregates to Secret of Evermore LP's page regardless of which episode you're on. If one should desire to leave a comment on a particular episode, that'd be done on the actual Youtube website.

That's how I understand it, at least.:X

For the record, Lantis' post is not what I'm doing. It's his suggestion.