Seven Deadly Sins
~hallelujah~
At the beginning of a generation, C&C always has issues dealing with the influx of new users, and often it means that we overcompensate for some of those issues. The past C&C term has seen the size and scope of QC balloon far past its original intention, and it's about time we bring QC back to its roots. This means a smaller, slimmer, more focused QC that puts more of the responsibility back in the writer's hands, and a renewal of the powerful moderating staff that kept C&C humming in earlier years. The result should be a more approachable C&C where the writer is more free to contribute their knowledge and experience to the Smogon Dex.
To help this change, we're implementing three key policies:
Trust the Writer
A lot of QC's issues recently have stemmed from an innate believe that those writing the analyses "don't get" what they're writing about, and that they need to be coddled. Most of the time, this isn't the case, and between huge rewrites and aggressive nitpicking, it can hurt enthusiasm about the process. Starting now, we're scaling back QC to a policy of implicit trust in the writer- unless it's obvious that a writer can't deliver us a solid analysis, or there's a significantly more qualified writer chafing at the bit to work on an analysis that was snapped up, QC will leave most of the work to the writer, and focus more on making their work shine. To that point, QC has three primary objectives:
Reassign Early and Often
I want to stress that reassignment is not an apocalyptic situation, and it's not the worst thing that can happen to a Smogon C&C career. Reassignment is viewed as a worst-case scenario right now, when many of us think that it can be used more as a tool to ensure that the most qualified members are tasked with analyses that fit their skillset. The policy is always to trust the writer first, and this means that there is no bias against a new user that shows they are ready and capable. However, we know that it's easy for people to bite off more than they can chew and get a bit over-enthusiastic. The aim of this policy is to make reassignment less of a doomsday scenario, both by making it more common and also by directing users to mentoring when they get reassigned- it's not a rejection, it's an opportunity for improvement, and a recognition of the enthusiasm that a user has for contributing to C&C.
Reassignment is a moderator-only responsibility, and it is a QC member's job to let the moderators know when reassignment may be necessary (either through noticing issues with the analysis quality or by identifying a contributor that may be significantly more qualified than the current writer). It is the moderator's job to assess the situation and make the final call on whether or not to reassign the analysis. Moderators can also make regular C&C checks to identify problem analyses, and are not limited to exercising their powers only when prompted by QC.
Revise Early and Often
"Done" and "Uploaded" are not the end for a living document like the Smogon Pokedex, and with an ever-evolving metagame, nothing is ever truly finished. Badgeholders on Smogon have always had the ability to independently submit small revisions to the Pokedex when metagame shifts occur, or when they notice things that are just a bit out of place, like the order of slashes on an analysis, or an inefficient EV spread, or a new speed benchmark that a Pokemon should aim for in order to address specific threats. Larger changes can always be submitted via revamps, partial revamps, or new sets for an analysis, if a change needs more eyes on it. The third part of this reorganization is a call for anyone viewing the Pokedex or the written-but-not-uploaded analyses to put in their two cents if they feel they have something to add to the analysis. Site Staff are always on hand to filter the changes, but for the most part anything sane will be accepted by the staff. So no matter who you are, if you spot something you think you can improve, feel free to let us know, either through a SCMS update for Badgeholders or a post in the Small Subjective / Objective Changes threads in the base forum of any generation.
Conclusion
These changes should help streamline C&C and make it a bit more approachable in the time before the new Dex officially goes online. In the meantime, we hope that these changes make it simpler and easier for everyone to jump into C&C and make magic happen. This update also comes with a revised QC team: you can check the stickied Quality Control Team thread in the OU forum for more details.
To those who are no longer on the QC team: this is not a reflection on your quality or dedication, and when the time comes to add new QC members to the team, special consideration will be given to anyone who had QC status before the
TL;DR:
Quality Control Duties:
Moderator Duties:
Overall Announcements:
To help this change, we're implementing three key policies:
Trust the Writer
A lot of QC's issues recently have stemmed from an innate believe that those writing the analyses "don't get" what they're writing about, and that they need to be coddled. Most of the time, this isn't the case, and between huge rewrites and aggressive nitpicking, it can hurt enthusiasm about the process. Starting now, we're scaling back QC to a policy of implicit trust in the writer- unless it's obvious that a writer can't deliver us a solid analysis, or there's a significantly more qualified writer chafing at the bit to work on an analysis that was snapped up, QC will leave most of the work to the writer, and focus more on making their work shine. To that point, QC has three primary objectives:
- Assess the viability of a Pokemon or set. If the subject matter shouldn't go into the dex (no matter who writes it), it is REJECTED by the QC team and the analysis is shelved. Note that this is just an objective view of the Pokemon and of the sets posted. If none of the sets posted for a Pokemon are viable in the metagame, that Pokemon is eligible for rejection, but another user is free to bring up the Pokemon *as long as they have something novel to bring to the table*. Duplicates of already-rejected threads or sets are subject to immediate rejection by a member of the moderating staff, as well as a potential forum warning. Don't do it.
- Assess the ability of the writer to deliver a quality analysis. Some people are far more enthusiastic than they are skilled, and while we appreciate a level of enthusiasm, analyses are meant to be informative first, and sometimes people bite off a bit more than they can chew. it is QC's role to ensure that the right writer for the job is on the case. If there is any doubts as to the writer's ability, or if an enthusiastic and visibly more qualified writer appears, QC is tasked with bringing the matter to the moderation staff's notice so that they can make the final call. Note that the actual reassignment is the duty of the moderator, and the decision of whether or not to reassign falls squarely on their shoulders.
- Refine a set and help the writer deliver as quality an analysis as they can. Note that this doesn't mean that QC is tasked with rewriting entire sets and laying out every specific of an analysis. If a set is missing, it can be added later or in a separate thread. QC shouldn't be rewriting an entire analysis, and if it feels like it should, then the analysis should probably be reassigned. Note that this is, as always, up to moderator discretion- if you feel that something is on the borderline, feel free to contact me- i'll be around to resolve whatever needs input.
Reassign Early and Often
I want to stress that reassignment is not an apocalyptic situation, and it's not the worst thing that can happen to a Smogon C&C career. Reassignment is viewed as a worst-case scenario right now, when many of us think that it can be used more as a tool to ensure that the most qualified members are tasked with analyses that fit their skillset. The policy is always to trust the writer first, and this means that there is no bias against a new user that shows they are ready and capable. However, we know that it's easy for people to bite off more than they can chew and get a bit over-enthusiastic. The aim of this policy is to make reassignment less of a doomsday scenario, both by making it more common and also by directing users to mentoring when they get reassigned- it's not a rejection, it's an opportunity for improvement, and a recognition of the enthusiasm that a user has for contributing to C&C.
Reassignment is a moderator-only responsibility, and it is a QC member's job to let the moderators know when reassignment may be necessary (either through noticing issues with the analysis quality or by identifying a contributor that may be significantly more qualified than the current writer). It is the moderator's job to assess the situation and make the final call on whether or not to reassign the analysis. Moderators can also make regular C&C checks to identify problem analyses, and are not limited to exercising their powers only when prompted by QC.
Revise Early and Often
"Done" and "Uploaded" are not the end for a living document like the Smogon Pokedex, and with an ever-evolving metagame, nothing is ever truly finished. Badgeholders on Smogon have always had the ability to independently submit small revisions to the Pokedex when metagame shifts occur, or when they notice things that are just a bit out of place, like the order of slashes on an analysis, or an inefficient EV spread, or a new speed benchmark that a Pokemon should aim for in order to address specific threats. Larger changes can always be submitted via revamps, partial revamps, or new sets for an analysis, if a change needs more eyes on it. The third part of this reorganization is a call for anyone viewing the Pokedex or the written-but-not-uploaded analyses to put in their two cents if they feel they have something to add to the analysis. Site Staff are always on hand to filter the changes, but for the most part anything sane will be accepted by the staff. So no matter who you are, if you spot something you think you can improve, feel free to let us know, either through a SCMS update for Badgeholders or a post in the Small Subjective / Objective Changes threads in the base forum of any generation.
Conclusion
These changes should help streamline C&C and make it a bit more approachable in the time before the new Dex officially goes online. In the meantime, we hope that these changes make it simpler and easier for everyone to jump into C&C and make magic happen. This update also comes with a revised QC team: you can check the stickied Quality Control Team thread in the OU forum for more details.
To those who are no longer on the QC team: this is not a reflection on your quality or dedication, and when the time comes to add new QC members to the team, special consideration will be given to anyone who had QC status before the
TL;DR:
Quality Control Duties:
- Gauge the viability of a Pokemon or set in the OU metagame, and reject sets that are not viable
- Gauge the ability of the writer to deliver a quality analysis / set for the Pokemon
- Refine the analysis / set, helping the writer polish their submission and making it the best that it can be
Moderator Duties:
- Reassign analyses in cases where the writer is unqualified or there is a more qualified individual willing to write the analysis
- Resolve disputes between users and QC members
- Perform final content / writing check before an analysis is uploaded (but after it receives all QC and GP checks)
Overall Announcements:
- QC Stamps are returning to 2 Skeleton, 1 Written
- QC Team has been shuffled, check the QC Team thread for a new list of members
- Reassignment will come with an express recommendation for mentoring
- Once the Dex is up and running, badgeholders are encouraged to make revisions to analyses directly if they see any issues. Non-badgeholders can, as always, suggest changes via the Small Subjective / Objective Changes threads in Sixth Generation Contributions.