Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Piratecat" data-source="post: 280698" data-attributes="member: 2">Free to join!!&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />&nbsp; See the announcement thread for who to email if you want to volunteer.------------------------------------------------------Balsamic Dragon, that's an interesting idea that I think would be simply unworkable. Not only would it require a tremendous amount of manpower, I would find it insulting as a GM. I don't want someone at HQ second-guessing me if they happen to disagree with what I've done to &quot;fix&quot; the module.&nbsp; If they trust me to volunteer, then they trust me to do a good job, and I don't want to be micromanaged until it becomes clear that I'm *not* doing a good job.A better technique may be to only require this sort of response from people to receive consistently low judge scores. Anyone flagged could be required to answer these sorts of questions until their scores rise. Still unwieldy, I'm afraid, but a little bit more logistically possible.&nbsp; In this sort of system, low-rated judges would probably be discouraged by the paperwork and remove themselves from the pool, thus making the pool of available judges slightly smaller but of higher quality.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Piratecat, post: 280698, member: 2"] Free to join!! :D See the announcement thread for who to email if you want to volunteer. ------------------------------------------------------ Balsamic Dragon, that's an interesting idea that I think would be simply unworkable. Not only would it require a tremendous amount of manpower, I would find it insulting as a GM. I don't want someone at HQ second-guessing me if they happen to disagree with what I've done to "fix" the module. If they trust me to volunteer, then they trust me to do a good job, and I don't want to be micromanaged until it becomes clear that I'm *not* doing a good job. A better technique may be to only require this sort of response from people to receive consistently low judge scores. Anyone flagged could be required to answer these sorts of questions until their scores rise. Still unwieldy, I'm afraid, but a little bit more logistically possible. In this sort of system, low-rated judges would probably be discouraged by the paperwork and remove themselves from the pool, thus making the pool of available judges slightly smaller but of higher quality. [/QUOTE]

Verification