Tulpa.info's Guide Approval Team

Recently, on the tulpa.info forums (or not so recently) there have been lots and lots of guides streaming into the guides section - some were new, some were interesting and worth the try - but most of them were just either rewrites of old guides, or some new idea that was explained incomprehensibly, or sloppily arranged, or the idea itself was simply not worth trying. As somebody who likes to make progress, this bothers me, just like the fact that if you go to http://www.tulpa.info and click "guides", you're simply taken to the forums guide page - where the guides new people will see will only be guides that have recently been posted or posted in - not necessarily helpful guides. Now of course there is the Great Big List of Guides sticky - but that's just what it is, a great big list of guides, there are still sloppily written and incomprehensible guides on there, and this bothers me to no end.

So I got an idea. I know (hope) that there are people on the forums who care for the quality of the community and would like to contribute, in some form, to said community. However, besides posting in the forums, there isn't really much to do other than, well, post. But there could be. What I want there to be is a Guide Approval Team - meaning, a team of members on the forums who are often active, are known to understand the basic concept of tulpas and know different forcing methods, are known to be somewhat fair in their judgment (though it is also important that they have their own opinion, this must by no means be a circlejerk and it would be favorable to have GATs who have opposing opinions on certain things, to balance things out) Who follow a certain set of guidelines to proofread guides, and decide whether those guides qualify for being on the front page.

Now you will probably think "Some guides work for some, and other guides work for others, you can't really objectively decide which guide is good and which is bad". This is true, to some extent, however one can still objectively point out that a guide is sloppily written, contains bad grammar, doesn't make sense, doesn't address things with a positive mindset, or is addressing something that has already been addressed by a guide on the front page. These, and many other things, are very important to writing good guides - and better guides will make for better tulpamancers, who, in turn, will make for a better community. If I remember correctly, Pleeb's idea of tulpa.info was to make a scientific approach towards tulpas - however I see very little of science and very much of speculation and "what i think is more true than what you think." So I devised a system that is supposed to monitor guides both objectively (things like what I mentioned above) and subjectively (a user rating and comment system, so that after somebody has tested a guide for a while (NOTE FOR A WHILE) they can give the guide a rating from 0-10, and explain why they gave said guide that rating)

I will explain how both of these systems, the GAT selection method, and the guide approval system works.




1. THE GAT SELECTION METHOD
It's important to have a team of members we can actually trust - this means members who are generally active and opinionated, and seem to care for the tulpa community - regardless of their approach. This means that even some more hostile/offensive members have the right to be a GAT. The approach should not be what matters, as even members who come off as "dickish" have an opinion, which is also an important part of what being a GAT is. They should represent the community, and no healthy community is one-sided. To be more clear, the requirements to be a GAT are:

- The individual is generally considered sensible by most, and is not a common troll or the local idiot
- The individual has the ability to listen to others, and have proper discussions - not somebody who will start a flame-war or feel offended at the smallest hint of something that may not be in their favor
- The individual has at least one vocal tulpa and is known to have at least an "intermediate" grasp of tulpamancing. In short - They know what they're doing. This does not mean that they have to be an expert in the field - very few, if any, are.
- The individual has the time to proofread guides and discuss them with other GATs - inactive GATs are pointless and will thus be removed from the team and replaced.
- The individual has their own opinion and isn't afraid to voice them
- The individual can criticize something without bashing it, and can give reasoning behind their criticism. (i.e. "this sucks" isn't constructive, but "you should try improving A and B so that Y and Z fit better together, your grammar is incorrect, and C and D have already been mentioned in guide X" is.)
- The individual knows how to properly speak English, and has the ability to recognize flaws in writing.
- The individual is not already a forum mod(people who are irc-mods only can still be GATs)




- THE GAT MEMBERS
Once the GAT system is finalized and put into effect, a thread will be made where, for two weeks, community members can nominate other members to become a GAT. MEMBERS CAN NOT NOMINATE THEMSELVES. After two weeks, nomination will be closed, and I will send a PM to all nominated members telling them that they have been nominated, and asking them if they wish to be a GAT. If they do not reply, they are removed from the list as per the inactivity rule. If the nominated member happened to be away for whatever reason, they can still reply upon returning and will then be reconsidered.

After all active members have replied and confirmed that they wish to be a GAT, I will make a poll including all nominated and willing members. Community members can then cast a vote for who they feel would be a good GAT - this includes voting for yourself, if you are in the poll. After two more weeks, voting will be closed, and .info will have their own Guide Approval Team.

A sticky will be made in the GAT Discussion subforum with a list of ALL GATs. These GATs will stay on this list, even if they are removed from the team - once this happens, they'll be placed in a separate "Former GATs" list. If a member requests to be removed from the team for any reason, they can do so, and will also retain the right to return to the team at any time unless the GAT member count increases to 40 by the time they wish to return, in which case they'll have to wait until another member is removed - however this is highly unlikely. If a GAT is removed due to not following the rules, they are not allowed to return to the team. (members who have been removed by request will have a "+" besides their name in the Former GATs list, indicating that they're still able to return)

Once a member gets removed, a pastebin will be kept in the GAT list thread with the member's name and the reason why they were removed. This is so that, if a community member disagrees with said reason, they can approach the GATs/GAT Manager about this to request that said member is placed back in the team. This will then be discussed among GATs and the community.

NOTE: For now, I have decided that we will need a minimum of 20 GAT members to make this work, with a maximum of 40 GAT members to not make things messy. This means that if 20 or less people would reply to the nominations, or less than 20 people would be nominated, all nominated and willing members will become GATs without the need for a vote.

NOTE2: GATs are not supposed to do things in secrecy. I wish to make a big point of this - every action performed by a GAT is open for discussion, the reasoning behind this being that if you make a decision, you should be able to back it. Thus, things such as private discussions among GATs will be logged and pastebinned in a sticky so that community members have the right to question this. Now I don't intend for the GAT system to be an eternal flamewar - everybody should stay civil, fair, and honest whenever giving their opinion. This system is meant to help the community improve, not make it worse.



- THE GAT MANAGER
This will be the go-to person when somebody has a complaint about a GAT, the GAT system, or when something needs to be discussed involving all GATs. Their vote will not count any more than other GATs, and they will not have the right to remove or add GATs at will. They are only a reference person, i.e. the one who makes sure to keep in touch with all GATs, tries to mediate disagreements between them, and the one who new suggestions are proposed to (though you can propose suggestions for the GAT system to any GAT, and they can round up the team as well), as well as the only member within the GAT to have mod privileges within the forums. This is so that GATs don't irrationally start moving threads back and forth - this also means that the GATM is supposed to be the most responsible member within the team. Also if the GATs seem to be ignoring you, you go to the GAT Manager, and it'll be their responsibility to approach other involved GATs about whatever problem you may have with them. Besides that, they are just regular GATs.

Requirements for being a GAT Manager are that there is a majority vote of the GATs on said person, and that they are a GAT themselves. (This means that the Manager selection will happen AFTER all the GATs have been chosen). To replace an already existing GAT Manager (for whatever reason), 75% of the GATs will have to agree on this. If they don't, the old GAT Manager will stay in place. If they do, the old GAT Manager is immediately replaced by the new one, and returns to being a regular GAT. If a GAT steps down, the new GAT Manager will be decided by majority vote.


NOTE: Replacing/removing a regular GAT happens in the same way that replacing the GAT Manager does, except only 60% of the GATs will have to agree upon this. Nominating a GAT for removal can be done by anyone, by starting a poll thread within the GAT Discussion forums listing your reason(s) for why you want this member removed. Users and GATs alike are free to vote and discuss within those threads. Polls are to be closed after a week, the majority vote deciding on whether a GAT gets removed or not. GAT Managers can also be removed though user vote, however if a community member makes a poll requesting removal of a GAT Manager, and community votes would result in a "no", but at least 75% of the GATs had voted "yes", the GATM will still be removed from the team.



2. THE GUIDE APPROVAL SYSTEM
First of all - an Approved guide would be a guide that has been deemed worthy of being on the front page by at least 60% of the Guide Approval Team. That's right - ALL the members in the team will have to have read and approved/disapproved of a guide before it'll be allowed on the front page. Now this would be messy if every submitted guide would go to all GAT's - so that's not how the system will work. I'll explain this in the next section.

- SUBMITTING A GUIDE AND GETTING IT APPROVED
 First of all, if we would want this to work, the forums would have to have the "Guides" section split into 3 sections:
- Pending Guides
- Approved Guides
- GAT Discussion

Guide submission should happen in the same way it usually does - through the forums. This is so that other members can point out mistakes as well, saving the GATs trouble from pointing out commonly seen and obvious mistakes in guides. We're going for quality and community involvement here, and it's important that as many members of the community try to help as possible - even if just a little. So, regular forum members would be able to criticize guides, and if they think a guide should be on the front page, they upvote it. The more upvotes a guide gets, the higher up on the guides page it will be - making it easier for one of the GATs to see it and proofread it.

If a GAT reads a guide and feels like it should be on the front page as well, they approve of it by posting so within the thread, and notify the GAT Manager, who then stickies the guide so that other GATs have the time to read it and make suggestions, before they decide on whether they want to approve of it or not. Once at least 60% of the GATs have made a post saying "Approved", the guide is then moved to the Approved subforum, and added to the "List of Approved Guides" sticky, where guides will be ordered by technique group (e.g. imposition, general, possession), and alphabetically), and also be subject to further criticism.

NOTE: An Approved guide does NOT have to be tested by a GAT for them to be able to approve of it. If the concept the guide is trying to convey looks like it will work to a GAT, and the guide fits all other criteria needed, they have the right to approve of it.

The "GAT Discussion" subforum is where all the complaints, pastebins, and other GAT-related questions and discussion go. Any kind of issue you have with a GAT member, the team as a whole, a decision made by the team or the system itself can and will be addressed there.

- DISAPPROVAL OF A GUIDE
If, at any time, a GAT is to change his/her mind and disapprove of a Pending guide (they will have to have approved of it first) they can disapprove of it, and their Approval vote won't count anymore. This can be for whatever reason they want, but they /will/ have to give their reasons. An Approved guide that is disapproved of by a GAT who formerly approved of it will be further discussed to decide whether it should be taken off the list or not. A MINOR SPELLING/GRAMMAR MISTAKE DOES NOT JUSTIFY A DISAPPROVAL. It's important that once a guide gets approved, it stays approved, until a guide comes along that fits the Replacement criteria - which I will explain later on.

If a community member who isn't a GAT severely disapproves of a guide and has good reason to do so, they can make a thread in the GAT Discussion subforum and pm a link to it to the GAT Manager, who will have to sticky it so it will be clearly visible, and also PM all of the GATs so they are aware of said complaint. The sticky will be free to post in, so all members can give their input on said complaint alongside the GATs, and it will remain stickied until the problem has been resolved. Once it has been solved it will only be deleted if the member who created the thread wishes it to be so. If they don't want it to be deleted, it will only be unstickied.

For a guide to be removed from the Approved subforum, 80% of the GATs will have to agree on doing this, and before it can be removed, a sticky will be made about this in the Approved Guides subforum, and community members can give their opinion on said decision for one week, before removal is either finalized or denied.

NOTE: If a community member is ignored by a GAT, they should notify the GAT Manager. If they are ignored by the GAT Manager, they should notify the forum mods/admins and make a post about it somewhere on the forums so it becomes public. Even though this is unlikely to happen (ignoring community members would go against the very purpose of being a GAT), I want this system to be fair for everybody.

GATs will not be superior or special members. They're just volunteers who put time and effort into making sure that the community will be clean, and that new members will get a proper introduction to tulpas - not a sloppy introduction, where they have no idea what the guides are trying to tell them and then wind up going on irc to ask how to make a tulpa, where they're often bombarded with several techniques and suggestions from all different kinds of tulpamancers and end up leaving more confused than when they came in. This is what the GAT is meant to prevent.



- THE SUBJECTIVE APPROVAL SYSTEM
The GAT won't have final say on the Approved guides. These guides are made for the community, and thus should always be open to be judged by the community. Thus, besides the (both objective and subjective) GAT system, community members will also have a say in the frontpage guides. They can do this by testing a guide for a certain period of time (which period is needed for which guides will be discussed later), and then giving their input on how well said guide worked for them. After having tested it for the required time period, the members can then post a pastebin of their progress report in the guide's thread, along with their summarized thoughts on it and a final conclusion, and then give it a 1-10 rating.

NOTE: Progress reports aren't necessary for a community rating to count, but will be appreciated. However, for your rating to count, you WILL need to give a reason for your rating.

It is both the community members' job and the GAT's job to make sure that these ratings aren't rash or irrational - THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT ENTIRELY DISAGREEING WITH A GUIDE AND IT'S NATURE IS IRRATIONAL. Community members, of course, hold the right to completely disagree with everything the guide tells you to do - as long as they give a proper reasoning behind it, their post and rating will count, even if it's a 1/10. What DOESN'T count is "dis guide sux. dont write guides u suk. gat wat r u doin. 0/10". The same goes for "omg dis guide so mazin 10000043291873123/10 i luv u so much omg ur guide werks so gud u rok". These are extreme examples, but if a community member or GAT sees a post they don't think contributes to the guide, they can notify the GAT Manager (or any GAT) about it, who will then notify a minimum of 4 other GATs to discuss whether this post should be removed or not.

A removed post is copied and posted into the "Removed Posts" sticky in the Approved Guides subforum. This sticky will be closed so it will only contain removed posts and nothing more, however members are always free to approach a GAT if they disagree with the removal of their, or another's post.

- SUBJECTIVE DISAPPROVAL
If an Approved guide receives numerous negative ratings, it will have to be reconsidered for disapproval.
Seeing as in this case, the community would already be agreeing that this guide does not belong on the front page, only 60% of the GATs will have to agree with it's removal before it is finalized. If GATs decide not to remove the guide, but complaints about it keep showing up, GAT opinions are disregarded and that guide will be removed.


- GUIDE REPLACEMENT
Earlier, I mentioned that many guides are rewrites of already existing guides. While this is usually not a good thing, sometimes a new guide shows up that explains more and goes into further detail than it's predecessor. When one of these "Better guides" shows up (which will probably be rare, and maybe not even happen), a GAT can mark it for Replacement (by posting so in the thread) and notify the GATM, who will then move it to the Approved subforum and sticky it. For a guide to fit the Replacement criteria, 90% of the GATs will have to give it a Replacement Approval vote. If this happens, the guide is then turned into a simple yes/no poll (i.e. "Should this guide replace X Guide?"), and is left stickied for 4 weeks. If both 90% of the GATs think it should, and the guide has the majority community vote, it will replace whichever guide it is a rewrite of in the Approved subforum - however, a link to the guide it replaced will still have to be posted within the Replacement guide. This should be a rare occurence, but I wanted this rule to be there just in case.


FINAL THOUGHTS
I know some of you may be thinking this will be way too complicated to be put into effect, but things are often simpler in practice than they are in theory - or vice-versa. This will obviously not always go smoothly, there will be issues, but I am thoroughly convinced that a system like this will help our small community improve for the better.

Now let's make this work.

- Zero