This is an idea that recently came to me. Currently, we have 3 projects going, which is too many. Even 2 projects seems like a hassle and is too slow.
Olimar and I were talking and thought it'd be a good idea to go from 2 projects at a time to 1.
We usually have a fixing the sheets project and a normal arrangement project opened at the same time, but what does everyone think of having only 1 at a time and switch off between normal and fixing the sheets? I noticed that not too many people are interested in fixing the sheets projects.
Here are some Pros to this idea. There is actually a lot of Pros which is why I brought this idea up.
Pros of having 1 project at a time:
- Pro: Projects would go faster; the Updaters could focus on one project at a time intern making things faster.
- Pro: Submissions would go faster. With less projects, the Updaters could focus on subs more and not have to worry about a handful of projects.
- Pro: With only 1 project, submissions could be bumped up to 3.....maybe.
- Pro: With only 1 project, the Updaters could work on other cool projects like, Olimar's featured arranger project(s), surprise/special projects, one vs. one competitions etc.
- Pro: We could discard the fixing the sheets project all together. We could make a board like submissions that is dedicated to replacements and the current arrangement board could be for new arrangements. I could design that board if people are interested.....
So, what does everyone think? :P
I wonder if we were going to have only 1 project. Couldn't it also be a combination of fixing and arranging? There are many games where there are some sheets that are old and poor but also songs that haven't been arranged, and this would be perfect for those games. One game that comes to mind is SSB Melee.
Quote from: mariolegofan on October 31, 2015, 10:52:20 AM- Pro: With only 1 project, the Updaters could work on other cool projects like, Olimar's featured arranger project(s), surprise/special projects, one vs. one competitions etc.
These all sound really cool! Could you explain more about them since I've only been around for several months?
Yeah, three projects does seem kind of excessive at times. Plus, the Mario & B-K ones barely get any attention at all. I think the mods would appreciate more time getting sheets on site than worrying about some of these projects. The only question should be which ones to get rid of and why. Here's my thoughts on that:
In my opinion, the "Replacing the Sheets" project seems kind of unnecessary, as we already have a "submit replacement sheet" option in NSM Panel already. Out of the three, it's the one I would get rid of automatically. Sure, there are some sheets that are in dire need of replacements, but someone can always replace it in Submissions.
"Fixing the Sheets" is a bit harder to justify getting rid of, since there's some sheets that look awful on site. However, we could institute one big project to reformat every single sheet that does not conform to standards, much like the "Replacing the URL" project. The two downsides to this would be 1) The music wouldn't be fixed at all, just the formatting, and 2) There wouldn't be much incentive for any of us to get it completed, considering most of us didn't make these sheets. But that's just an idea.
I do like the Arrangement Projects, considering that it gets a lot of attention, and tends to get down quicker than the other two. Imo it should stay.
But hey, that's just my two cents. ;)
Are you considering the fact that arrangement projects reduce traffic towards regular submissions as well?
Why not just have a separate updater team for projects, since they're becoming a regular thing anyways and deserve to have regular and predictable rate of approval. The cons I see with removing one are:
1) You'd have to sacrifice one of two very different but equally important arrangement projects. If you get rid of Arrangement Projects, well, everyone would be sad. If you get rid of the Replacing the Sheet's project, the rate at which NSM will modernize will slow to a crawl.
2) You have no way to control Unofficial arrangement projects, which demand a large amount of updater attention as well. Even if they don't get their own update, it's just a large amount of arrangements going through the regular process.
If you use my idea, then the cons become:
1) Spreading the updater team too thin and/or finding enough qualified people to make a second team.
It's less cons, but I can understand how it could be an insurmountable one, so I dunno. If we had to get rid of one, I would prefer we got rid of arrangement projects rather than the Updating the Sheets. The only real positive to Arrangement projects is the fun and sense of teamwork. Updating the sheets is sorely needed, and while it may be less exciting *cough* Super Mario 64 *cough* I would really like to see all those crap sheets disappear in my life time.
Quote from: FireArrow on October 31, 2015, 12:15:34 PMAre you considering the fact that arrangement projects reduce traffic towards regular submissions as well?
I knew I forgot one :P
I totally agree.
Quote from: FireArrow on October 31, 2015, 12:15:34 PMWhy not just have a separate updater team for projects, since they're becoming a regular thing anyways and deserve to have regular and predictable rate of approval. The cons I see with removing one are:
I like this idea too but there really isn't any Updaters that are really interested in projects.
Quote from: FireArrow on October 31, 2015, 12:15:34 PM1) You'd have to sacrifice one of two very different but equally important arrangement projects. If you get rid of Arrangement Projects, well, everyone would be sad. If you get rid of the Replacing the Sheet's project, the rate at which NSM will modernize will slow to a crawl.
That's why I thought we could have a separate submission board exclusive to replacements.
Everyone could have 4 sheets.....2 normal and 2 replacement.
Quote from: FireArrow on October 31, 2015, 12:15:34 PM2) You have no way to control Unofficial arrangement projects, which demand a large amount of updater attention as well. Even if they don't get their own update, it's just a large amount of arrangements going through the regular process.
Yeah, I'm not really a big fan of unofficial projects.
Quote from: FireArrow on October 31, 2015, 12:15:34 PM1) Spreading the updater team too thin and/or finding enough qualified people to make a second team.
You hit the nail on the head! One of the biggest problems imo, is the lack of Updaters. Even 1 or 2 more Updaters would help A LOT. You could have 3 for subs and 3 for projects.
Quote from: FireArrow on October 31, 2015, 12:15:34 PMIt's less cons, but I can understand how it could be an insurmountable one, so I dunno. If we had to get rid of one, I would prefer we got rid of arrangement projects rather than the Updating the Sheets. The only real positive to Arrangement projects is the fun and sense of teamwork. Updating the sheets is sorely needed, and while it may be less exciting *cough* Super Mario 64 *cough* I would really like to see all those crap sheets disappear in my life time.
I agree. It's terrible that we have so many crappy arrangements on site. Imo, replacements are the most important thing. That's why I brought up the idea of having a separate board for them. Then, we could focus on any or all games, instead of just 1 at a time. That'd bring more interest among the members.
Quote from: Yug_Guy on October 31, 2015, 11:48:41 AMYeah, three projects does seem kind of excessive at times. Plus, the Mario & B-K ones barely get any attention at all. I think the mods would appreciate more time getting sheets on site than worrying about some of these projects. The only question should be which ones to get rid of and why. Here's my thoughts on that:
The staff decided that we won't have 3 projects again. The Banjo project was started by Deku and I without a poll (the last project we won't have a poll for) and that project is soon to completion.
Quote from: Yug_Guy on October 31, 2015, 11:48:41 AMIn my opinion, the "Replacing the Sheets" project seems kind of unnecessary, as we already have a "submit replacement sheet" option in NSM Panel already. Out of the three, it's the one I would get rid of automatically. Sure, there are some sheets that are in dire need of replacements, but someone can always replace it in Submissions.
According to Olimar, the Replacing the sheets thing has been discarded. It will be fixing the sheets from now on which is fixing and replacing.
Quote from: Yug_Guy on October 31, 2015, 11:48:41 AMI do like the Arrangement Projects, considering that it gets a lot of attention, and tends to get down quicker than the other two. Imo it should stay.
I agree, but we should have one at a time imo.
Quote from: Tobbeh99 on October 31, 2015, 11:08:47 AMI wonder if we were going to have only 1 project. Couldn't it also be a combination of fixing and arranging? There are many games where there are some sheets that are old and poor but also songs that haven't been arranged, and this would be perfect for those games. One game that comes to mind is SSB Melee.
Well, any game we do for a normal arrangement project is bound to have songs that need replaced. Paper Mario and Animal Crossing: New Leaf both hands songs that needed replaced and they were normal arrangement projects.
Quote from: FireArrow on October 31, 2015, 12:15:34 PMAre you considering the fact that arrangement projects reduce traffic towards regular submissions as well?
Why not just have a separate updater team for projects, since they're becoming a regular thing anyways and deserve to have regular and predictable rate of approval. The cons I see with removing one are:
If you use my idea, then the cons become:
1) Spreading the updater team too thin and/or finding enough qualified people to make a second team.
It's less cons, but I can understand how it could be an insurmountable one, so I dunno. If we had to get rid of one, I would prefer we got rid of arrangement projects rather than the Updating the Sheets. The only real positive to Arrangement projects is the fun and sense of teamwork. Updating the sheets is sorely needed, and while it may be less exciting *cough* Super Mario 64 *cough* I would really like to see all those crap sheets disappear in my life time.
The Project/Submission updater split was actually something i formulated a while ago. Like you said, spreading the updater team too thin would obviously reduce efficiently (if only there were people who would be willing to take the spot ;)). I think you would need 6 updaters to do this properly; we could always add a 7th if need be (for instance, if projects required more attention than submissions, or vice versa). Oh yea, and another hypothetical question. If there was this division of updaters, would their privileges be limited to their role? Actually, that might not be that important; we kind of have to establish the idea further first. I don't think the issue is too many projects as much as not enough staff members to support them. Since both fixing the sheets and arranging new sheets are crucial, I believe that we should seek out a couple more updater candidates and split them between projects and submissions.
I like your idea, TMP! But, we need to get the most important opinions, the Updaters.
Quote from: mariolegofan on October 31, 2015, 10:52:20 AMOlimar and I were talking and thought it'd be a good idea to go from 2 projects at a time to 1.
Woah woah woah, that's not what I said. I said that three was
one too many, and went on to comment that fixing the sheets projects can't last forever, since we will eventually fix all of the old sheets.
Combining arrangement projects with fixing the sheets projects would be a cool idea. The only issue with that is some sections only need fixing or don't need that many new arrangements.
Quote from: Olimar12345 on November 01, 2015, 06:43:41 AMWoah woah woah, that's not what I said. I said that three was one too many, and went on to comment that fixing the sheets projects can't last forever, since we will eventually fix all of the old sheets.
lol.....my bad XD
Quote from: Olimar12345 on November 01, 2015, 06:43:41 AMCombining arrangement projects with fixing the sheets projects would be a cool idea. The only issue with that is some sections only need fixing or don't need that many new arrangements.
This^
Olimar, what do you think of another section like submissions, but is only devoted to replacements?
Quote from: Olimar12345 on November 01, 2015, 06:43:41 AMCombining arrangement projects with fixing the sheets projects would be a cool idea. The only issue with that is some sections only need fixing or don't need that many new arrangements.
Yea, this is kind of what I was going for. The Arrangement Projects are obviously important, and those should stay. The other one would then be the Fixing/Replacing the Sheets project. I think this site is perfectly capable of running regular submissions along with 2 projects. The only thing is, we have but 4 updaters. That would be a substantial number...if they could spend their entire day on NSM. But they can't. I mean, they have to be learning all this musical knowledge from somewhere, right? And let's face it, these guys are doing this out of pure love for music and Nintendo. They aren't getting paid to do this. Oh, right, the point I was trying to make. With school and jobs and other stuff like that, four people maintaining submissions and 2 projects is not enough, in my opinion. I personally think it would be more efficient to have one team of updaters for projects and one for submissions. But cutting the number of available updaters for each section in half wouldn't really help with efficiency, now would it? So the solution (if we switched over to this system) would be to find at least 2 more site members who are qualified to be updaters (you can decide what "qualified" is) and then split the team: 3 for projects, and 3 for submissions. Heck, if we could get up to 7 updaters, we could have 3 for subs, 2 for APs, and 2 for Fixing the Sheets. If this idea goes through, of course, you'd have to think about who to nominate for the updater roles, but I definitely think this site has some viable candidates. Feel free to attack any or all flaws in this idea.
Replacing and fixing should be one, I never understood why there's two of them in first place.
Quote from: mariolegofan on December 27, 2014, 02:44:32 PMThe "Replacing the Sheets" Project is an organized effort ... to bring each and every sheet of music on Ninsheetmusic up to the current standard.
Quote from: Latios212 on September 19, 2015, 09:11:51 PMThe "Fixing the Sheets" Project is an organized effort ... to bring each and every sheet of music on NinSheetMusic up to the current standard.
'poteito' 'potahto' duh
Quote from: DonValentino on November 01, 2015, 07:23:05 AMReplacing and fixing should be one, I never understood why there's two of them in first place.
'poteito' 'potahto' duh
You win the prize.
I don't like the idea of splitting the updater team, but I'm all for combining projects so they encompass both fixing and arranging; that's something I advocated for a while back.
Quote from: Latios212 on November 01, 2015, 08:15:19 AMI don't like the idea of splitting the updater team, but I'm all for combining projects so they encompass both fixing and arranging; that's something I advocated for a while back.
I agree, maybe "splitting" wasn't exactly the best term to uses. I didn't want it to sound like we were breaking the unity of the updating team. What I was kind of going for was that in this hypothetical 6 updater team, everyone would still have the same privileges and would still have the ability to collaborate over everything. The difference would be that half the team would spend the majority of their time on subs, while the others would be on projects a lot. I just think that having 3 people dedicated to each significant part of the NSM community would be better than having each member of the current team of 4 kinda splitting their individual time between the two. Like I said, I am not trying to advocate a split in the team here. For example, if Bespinben were part of the submissions team but saw something wrong in some sheet for a project, there would be no problem with him pointing it out. However, depending on how the idea develops, I think that he would point out the initial issues, and the project updaters could then handle the fixes from there. Basically, what I'm trying to say is that if we had 6 updaters, they could do everything the current ones do. Half would just "specialize" in submissions, while the rest would focus more on projects. I'm not trying to create a schism; rather, I'm going for a 2 division "league" of updaters, if you will. It's kind of like divisions in the NFL or MLB (or any sport league, really). They don't break up the league. They just kind of make it a bit more organized. And teams still play against other teams that are not in their division; they just play games within their division more often. (And that's enough sports for one day on NSM. ;D)
Quote from: DonValentino on November 01, 2015, 07:23:05 AMReplacing and fixing should be one, I never understood why there's two of them in first place.
'poteito' 'potahto' duh
That's what I said:
Quote from: mariolegofan on October 31, 2015, 01:00:35 PMthe Replacing the sheets thing has been discarded. It will be fixing the sheets from now on which is fixing and replacing.
I don't think we should have anymore replacement projects. It should be fixing the sheets like it is now.
Quote from: Latios212 on November 01, 2015, 08:15:19 AMI don't like the idea of splitting the updater team
I agree. Splitting the team is a bad idea.
I liked the idea of assigning an Updater to a project before it even starts like what we did with Animal Crossing: New Leaf.
Also:
Quote from: mariolegofan on November 01, 2015, 06:59:09 AMUpdaters, what do you think of another section like submissions, but is only devoted to replacements?
I like this idea the best^
and I'd like to know what the Updaters think :P
Quote from: Latios212 on November 01, 2015, 08:15:19 AMI don't like the idea of splitting the updater team, but I'm all for combining projects so they encompass both fixing and arranging; that's something I advocated for a while back.
The idea is to get more updaters who edit and accept sheets for the project rather than working on the submission board. I'm going to say that if we want the projects to run at a reasonable rate, this is necessary. The submission board has been absolutely fabulous, we've just had a 60 sheet update along with a Halloween one.
Fixing the Sheet Project? Hasn't been touched in two months.
New Leaf Arrangement? Seems like it's crawling along.
Replacing the Sheets? Um, lol.
We just don't have the man power. Yes, replacing and fixing need to get combined, I have no clue why we have two in the first place.
I disagree with the idea of combining Arrangement projects and sheet replacements. It wouldn't reduce the workload too noticeably (it's an entire OST rather than one and a half OSTs, woop woop?) and it would slow the rate that problematic sheets get replaced, which I feel should be a priority.
(Note: My take on it is different than TMP's. I'd rather see 2-4 lesser updaters who don't have the same privileges the 4 main ones have. No badge or ability to press the "accept" button in the submission board, just the authority to go through and edit the sheets in the projects (what Don was doing with the New Leaf project.) They can then, depending on how Olimar views their capabilities, either accept the sheets for the next update or send off the now easier to critique sheets to you guys.)
Quote from: FireArrow on November 01, 2015, 12:55:14 PM(Note: My take on it is different than TMP's. I'd rather see 2-4 lesser updaters who don't have the same privileges the 4 main ones have. No badge or ability to press the "accept" button in the submission board, just the authority to go through and edit the sheets in the projects (what Don was doing with the New Leaf project.) They can then, depending on how Olimar views their capabilities, either accept the sheets for the next update or send off the now easier to critique sheets to you guys.)
This is moving in the right direction, I like it. When I went out and said that all 6 updaters would have equal power, I probably did go too far. I wasn't worried about the permissions and stuff as much. I was basically trying to get at FireArrow's point: we need more people. I was just trying to cover myself up for using the term "splitting" because it kinda gave a bad connotation. Anyway, FA's idea is better than mine, I think.
Quote from: FireArrow on November 01, 2015, 12:55:14 PM(Note: My take on it is different than TMP's. I'd rather see 2-4 lesser updaters who don't have the same privileges the 4 main ones have. No badge or ability to press the "accept" button in the submission board, just the authority to go through and edit the sheets in the projects (what Don was doing with the New Leaf project.) They can then, depending on how Olimar views their capabilities, either accept the sheets for the next update or send off the now easier to critique sheets to you guys.)
^^^^^
Quote from: TheMarioPianist on November 01, 2015, 01:39:33 PMThis is moving in the right direction, I like it. When I went out and said that all 6 updaters would have equal power, I probably did go too far. I wasn't worried about the permissions and stuff as much. I was basically trying to get at FireArrow's point: we need more people. I was just trying to cover myself up for using the term "splitting" because it kinda gave a bad connotation. Anyway, FA's idea is better than mine, I think.
I agree!
Quote from: DonValentino on November 01, 2015, 07:23:05 AMReplacing and fixing should be one, I never understood why there's two of them in first place.
*Quote from mariolegofan*
*Virtually identical quote from Latios*
'poteito' 'potahto' duh
This is kinda because someone(s) copy/pasted my original OP that I used for the Pokémon Project. I was the one to write both of those. ::)
MLF did it first, and then Latios copied that if my memory serves correctlyI don't really have that huge of an issue with it; it's just kinda disheartening to spend so much time and effort writing that as cohesively as possible and then just having people steal it as need arises.
This is kinda irrelevant to the topic but I just wanted to explain that cuz there really actually was a reason behind it.
Quote from: FireArrow on October 31, 2015, 12:15:34 PMWhy not just have a separate updater team for projects, since they're becoming a regular thing anyways and deserve to have regular and predictable rate of approval. The cons I see with removing one are:
Quote from: mariolegofan on October 31, 2015, 01:00:35 PMI like this idea too but there really isn't any Updaters that are really interested in projects.
*Later on*Quote from: Latios212 on November 01, 2015, 08:15:19 AMI don't like the idea of splitting the updater team, but I'm all for combining projects so they encompass both fixing and arranging; that's something I advocated for a while back.
Quote from: mariolegofan on November 01, 2015, 10:31:53 AMI agree. Splitting the team is a bad idea.
XD Just thought that was really funny
But my thoughts: Both options have their pros and cons, and while I've had a bit of trouble following the conversation, maybe it's already been mentioned but I think: Arrangement project and fixing the sheets = One project. Then have a max of 2 projects on at once. (But I'd recommend only 1 at a time) This should keep us from having to split the current updater team while actually
increasing productivity in both the projects as well as regular submissions/replacements. I'm just trying not to overthink it too much.
Quote from: JDMEK5 on November 02, 2015, 05:38:20 AMThis is kinda because someone(s) copy/pasted my original OP that I used for the Pokémon Project. I was the one to write both of those. ::)
MLF did it first, and then Latios copied that if my memory serves correctly
I don't really have that huge of an issue with it; it's just kinda disheartening to spend so much time and effort writing that as cohesively as possible and then just having people steal it as need arises.
Hey! I repurposed it specifically BECAUSE it was well written. [emoji14] Feel honored that your project has been reincarnated!
Quote from: Latios212 on November 02, 2015, 08:00:56 AMHey! I repurposed it specifically BECAUSE it was well written. [emoji14] Feel honored that your project has been reincarnated!
As I do. lol
Yeah, I remember way back when Olimar appointed you lord of fixing the sheets :3Quote from: JDMEK5 on November 02, 2015, 05:38:20 AMBut my thoughts: Both options have their pros and cons, and while I've had a bit of trouble following the conversation, maybe it's already been mentioned but I think: Arrangement project and fixing the sheets = One project. Then have a max of 2 projects on at once. (But I'd recommend only 1 at a time) This should keep us from having to split the current updater team while actually increasing productivity in both the projects as well as regular submissions/replacements. I'm just trying not to overthink it too much.
No, it would not increase productivity, or at least by a significant margin. I took a half hour to write out all the math and decided it would be too tl;dr to get any attention from important people, so I'll just leave it at this. Your idea would reduce the current workload to less than 33%, so if you want to see a project that has downtime waiting for the staff that's less than 3-4 months, something else is going to have to change. There's 3 conclusions you can draw from this:
1)
The current staff doesn't have the man power to handle both projects and submissions.2)
The current state of things is not an accurate representation of the staffs capabilities.3)
The staff is currently putting a lot of effort into something ephemeral, taking a lot of focus outside of arrangement projects.If either 2 or 3 are true, then no solution is needed. If 1 is true, then we have the following solutions:
1)
Remove official arrangement projects all together and make everyone submit their own stuff.2)
Reduce the workload of arrangement projects to something more manageable.3)
Add more man power to the staff.The first solution is a bit sad, but I could life with it. The second one is completely implausible, because you'd have to reduce the size of things far beyond simply combining them in order to get the desired results. Three is probably the best solution, but requires both willingness from the staff (they seem to be pretty conservative when it comes to community suggestions and discussion, and rightfully so since things are in a better state then ever before) and candidates for the staff (I sure ain't one and the few qualified people I can think of aren't very active.)
Honestly, I vote for getting rid of official arrangement projects all together. Combining them might give it life for another month or so, but it'll just die again. Getting more staff members isn't gonna happen unless Olimars willing to host free theory lessons for the few people on this forum who have the time to make such a commitment. The submission board is going quite well and I don't see any reason why we can't just submit our things there.
Let's see...
So in my opinion there isn't a problem with the amount of manpower (knowledge and capability) around here. I'd say the problem is more because the bursts of free time and motivation within the staff come somewhat spontaneously, and even more so because the updaters aren't being used efficiently. (See below.)
Best ways to help fix, in my opinion:
- On the community side: More feedback from the community on the actual sheets. Believe it or not, not all the sheets that end up on the updaters` desks are almost perfect. I'd say a significant portion of what we end up doing is trivial stuff that anyone could do, like making sure notes and articulations don't collide, which ends up eating up a lot of our time that we could be using to approve more sheets. The mindset right now seems to be that once you submit something for a project, it's in the hands of the updaters, but actually we need as much feedback from people as possible in order for the updaters to just put a stamp of approval on everything and move on. Besides TMP, FireArrow, and Tobbeh, the SM64 project has been pretty much dead in regards to feedback. What happened to everyone who voted for it?
- On the staff side: Set timed goals. We've been successfully reaching our 20-subs-per-month minimum, but, err, we don't have a set schedule for projects at all.
As for new staff:
Quote from: FireArrow on November 02, 2015, 05:58:49 PMthe few qualified people I can think of aren't very active.
And I'm not the person to discuss new staff with, anyway.
This might not sound very nice, but rather than speculate when projects will finish, I suggest everyone help move them along. Please? This comes up again and again, but I can't stress enough the importance of community feedback and support in helping to fix sheets. Anyone can do it.
Quote from: Latios212 on November 02, 2015, 06:35:57 PMThis might not sound very nice, but rather than speculate when projects will finish, I suggest everyone help move them along. Please?
beautiful
I wonder if it might be helpful to have a separate set of staff (maybe just for community projects, maybe for submissions as well) whose goal is, above all else, to address and fix aesthetic things, like the aforementioned "notes and articulations colliding" and general formatting issues; anyone with access to the proper template or Finale can give a sheet the formatting it needs if it doesn't have it already. Then, all the "musical" updaters would have to do is address the musical elements, and not formatting issues.
I think it'd help tremendously in taking the workload off the current updaters, freeing up more time for looking at and accepting submissions/projects, and I don't think it'd take too much time out of the "formatting" updaters' day to fix simple formatting issues.
Quote from: Latios212 on November 02, 2015, 06:35:57 PMSo in my opinion there isn't a problem with the amount of manpower (knowledge and capability) around here. I'd say the problem is more because the bursts of free time and motivation within the staff come somewhat spontaneously, and even more so because the updaters aren't being used efficiently. (See below.)
People are people and updating isn't a paid job, so using a high, consistent level performance as a measurement of what an individual updater is capable of isn't going to work. The idea of adding more man power is that having more people with spontaneous free time and motivation equates to more work getting done.
QuoteBest ways to help fix, in my opinion:
- On the community side: More feedback from the community on the actual sheets. Believe it or not, not all the sheets that end up on the updaters` desks are almost perfect. I'd say a significant portion of what we end up doing is trivial stuff that anyone could do, like making sure notes and articulations don't collide, which ends up eating up a lot of our time that we could be using to approve more sheets. The mindset right now seems to be that once you submit something for a project, it's in the hands of the updaters, but actually we need as much feedback from people as possible in order for the updaters to just put a stamp of approval on everything and move on. Besides TMP, FireArrow, and Tobbeh, the SM64 project has been pretty much dead in regards to feedback. What happened to everyone who voted for it?
To be fair, this is also an example of why non staff plebs have little power in arrangement projects (as opposed to the submission board, where community feedback is easy and effective and threads don't "die".) Iirc, the feedback you mentioned still has yet to even result in anything... because the project is dead. If we were updaters, we could go in and make the changes ourselves (a la Don in New Leaf.) That's why I think we need some sort of drastic change to projects, they don't run smoothly and they're too reliant on motivated staff members. The best way to do this besides finding more staff is simply doing away with the "Official" title and make people get the sheets onto site using the method proven to work - the submission board.
Quote from: FireArrow on November 02, 2015, 06:57:06 PMThe best way to do this besides finding more staff is simply doing away with the "Official" title and make people get the sheets onto site using the method proven to work - the submission board.
I honestly don't want arrangement projects to go away. The submission board may be "proven to work" but it's also slow as molasses to get a lot of things accepted through it. Like, I've said before my plan is to get all the Hamtaro sheets on site. Without a personal update, or an arrangement project, this is going to take
at least six years, and while I like participating in other arrangement projects (like GSC) I can't justify putting them through submissions when a) Latios has already looked at and approved of half of my GSC sheets and b) it's time I
can't use for the Hamtaro sheets.
This is a personal anecdote but really, I think separate arrangement projects are important.
Quote from: Altissimo on November 02, 2015, 07:01:12 PMI honestly don't want arrangement projects to go away. The submission board may be "proven to work" but it's also slow as molasses to get a lot of things accepted through it. Like, I've said before my plan is to get all the Hamtaro sheets on site. Without a personal update, or an arrangement project, this is going to take at least six years, and while I like participating in other arrangement projects (like GSC) I can't justify putting them through submissions when a) Latios has already looked at and approved of half of my GSC sheets and b) it's time I can't use for the Hamtaro sheets.
This is a personal anecdote but really, I think separate arrangement projects are important.
Arrangement projects are significantly slower from a number of sheets perspective (though I suppose it's still faster if you're trying to upload an OST?) If you wanna try to keep them in a way that isn't unreasonably slow, we either need more staff members (which includes ideas like yours, which I really like ;3) or at least making them more conductive to community feedback.
Quote from: FireArrow on November 02, 2015, 06:57:06 PMThe idea of adding more man power is that having more people with spontaneous free time and motivation equates to more work getting done.
Again, I'm not in charge of this and I'm not completely clear on why we don't need more staff, but from what I understand we simply don't have any perfect candidates. Who are you thinking of?
Quote from: FireArrow on November 02, 2015, 06:57:06 PMTo be fair, this is also an example of why non staff plebs have little power in arrangement projects (as opposed to the submission board, where community feedback is easy and effective and threads don't "die".) Iirc, the feedback you mentioned still has yet to even result in anything... because the project is dead. If we were updaters, we could go in and make the changes ourselves (a la Don in New Leaf.) That's why I think we need some sort of drastic change to projects, they don't run smoothly and they're too reliant on motivated staff members. The best way to do this besides finding more staff is simply doing away with the "Official" title and make people get the sheets onto site using the method proven to work - the submission board.
Well this would be solved if everyone simply gave consent for their sheets to be fixed up by others. Which I don't think would be difficult to get? We're a pretty collaborative community. Again, I'm still not sure who exactly you're referring to.
Quote from: Latios212 on November 02, 2015, 07:08:48 PMWell this would be solved if everyone simply gave consent for their sheets to be fixed up by others. Which I don't think would be difficult to get? We're a pretty collaborative community. Again, I'm still not sure who exactly you're referring to.
Formatting-wise it shouldn't be an issue. Musical-wise, some people (like me!) want to hear and fix their own mistakes rather than having them fixed for them.
Quote from: Latios212 on November 02, 2015, 07:08:48 PMAgain, I'm not in charge of this and I'm not completely clear on why we don't need more staff, but from what I understand we simply don't have any perfect candidates. Who are you thinking of?
Well this would be solved if everyone simply gave consent for their sheets to be fixed up by others. Which I don't think would be difficult to get? We're a pretty collaborative community. Again, I'm still not sure who exactly you're referring to.
I'm not referring to anybody. The lack of good candidates is why I prefer just deleting them (though altissimo offers a good alternate solution.) I suppose we could set up the project into a subforum similar to the submission board, having each arrangement in its own thread. Giving people consent to change each others sheets would be too chaotic.
Quote from: FireArrow on November 02, 2015, 05:58:49 PMHonestly, I vote for getting rid of official arrangement projects all together.
Well, here's the thing. If we do this, we'll get our 20ish sheets per update still. But the valuable arrangers on this site are left out to dry once those two are done. And when you got people like MLF who calls himself Mr. Arranging Machine (or something like that), we're wasting their talent at a measly pace of 2 per update. When MLF had the Animal Crossing project open, he arranged over 20 songs (I keep using MLF, but he's the best example for the situation). IN addition, how are we gonna keep up with new games as their OSTs come out? Taking away Arrangement Projects will reduce the site's efficiency...and it won't please the updaters to have an increase in their submissions workload. So yea, I don't know what the fix is, but I think whether we can (or should) add new staff or not is really the central question here.
Quote from: TheMarioPianist on November 02, 2015, 07:27:38 PMTaking away Arrangement Projects will reduce the site's efficiency...and it won't please the updaters to have an increase in their submissions workload. So yea, I don't know what the fix is, but I think whether we can (or should) add new staff or not is really the central question here.
I agree. I didn't bring up the idea of taking out
all projects, but of taking out 1 or even reducing the load by a little bit.
Quote from: TheMarioPianist on November 02, 2015, 07:27:38 PMMLF who calls himself Mr. Arranging Machine (or something like that), we're wasting their talent at a measly pace of 2 per update. When MLF had the Animal Crossing project open, he arranged over 20 songs (I keep using MLF, but he's the best example for the situation).
Spoiler
(https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg1.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20140909101218%2Fthehungergames%2Fimages%2Fe%2Fea%2FOh_stop_it_you.png&hash=93947c8462859340a451f5eca5faef83163b893c)
Quote from: mariolegofan on November 02, 2015, 07:34:01 PMI agree. I didn't bring up the idea of taking out all projects, but of taking out 1 or even reducing the load by a little bit.
I know you didn't bring it up. I was referring to this:
Quote from: FireArrow on November 02, 2015, 05:58:49 PMHonestly, I vote for getting rid of official arrangement projects all together. Combining them might give it life for another month or so, but it'll just die again. Getting more staff members isn't gonna happen unless Olimars willing to host free theory lessons for the few people on this forum who have the time to make such a commitment. The submission board is going quite well and I don't see any reason why we can't just submit our things there.
Yeah. Frankly, taking out projects all together is a bad idea.