Up in Adminland we've been talking about potentially changing the game requirements for our ranks. First and foremost, our goal is not to increase your burden as a rank, but we do feel that the corporal and lieutenant requirements could be reevaluated to increase rank engagement with the FC.
THIS IS NOT A SET PLAN. WE ARE LOOKING FOR FEEDBACK. IF WE GET ENOUGH PUSHBACK AND PEOPLE WANT TO KEEP IT THE SAME, THAT IS COOL, TOO.
We just don't think playing one game every three months accomplishes the outcome we had in mind when the corporal rank was introduced (that is, the corporal rank was never meant to be a rank where you stayed for many months--it was simply meant to be a low-threshold "welcome to the FC" and we fully expected ranks to want to play more than one game every three months, resulting in their promotion to lieutenant when they played more than their requirement). We are realizing, however, that many corporals are not playing more than their requirement, and as a result, we have a substantial rank population that hardly interacts with the larger FC community. Three months is a long time to remember how we do things, and many corporals who use their full three months between games often need refreshers and feel uncomfortable leading games right off the bat when they come back. This is not what we want.
As a result, we want to change the corporal game requirement. But to keep our ranks proportional, we will also then need to change the lieutenant rank requirements accordingly.
The captain rank game requirement will not change
.
We have two proposals. One is the traditional game requirement. The second changes our perspective: the requirements changes to a report-based requirement, rather than games.
Proposal 1
:
Captains: 1 game per week
Lieutenants: 1 game per 2 weeks
Corporals: 1 game per month
Proposal 2
:
Captains: 1 report per week
Lieutenants: 2 reports per month
Corporals: 1 report per month
Of course, there are lots of numbers we can substitute for the above. Either way, Admin will still be keeping track of games played for promotion and cookie purposes. Part of Admin is of the opinion that monthly engagement with the FC shouldn't be too much to ask for any of our ranks,
but we're aware that bi-weekly requirements for lieutenants may be frowned at.
This is what stimulated our discussion of having report-based requirements instead. The report-based requirement is simply us counting the number of reports you post. This is better, in our minds, than saying lieutenants are required to play 2 games per month. In that case, our goal of increased engagement with our FC doesn't get met because you can easily get it done in one go. Therefore, 2 reports per month means that you'd have to visit the FC on 2 separate occasions in 1 month, which does help us reach our goal of increased rank engagement, while allowing you to do those 2 visits any time you want over the month, rather than restricting you to bi-weekly requirements. We think this flexibility is valuable.
We'd like to hear your perspective on this.
If you think no change is needed, please tell us. If you think you'd like to see a change, but neither of these two proposals are things you like, please tell us what you think would be better. If you like one proposal over the other, please tell us. If you like the game proposal but don't like the numbers we chose, please tell us.