SpringRTS Organizational specification - Page 2

SpringRTS Organizational specification

Various things about Spring that do not fit in any of the other forums listed below, including forum rules.

Moderator: Moderators

8611
XTA Developer
Posts: 242
Joined: 29 Dec 2014, 08:22

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by 8611 »

Those groups/titles are good for nothing (both functional and organizational) and simply historic relicts that are only kept because whenever someone is about to delete that someone else came up with silly reasons like "it is part of spring history" or "he deserves to keep old title."
Or maybe it eases people's mind if for every uneasy decision there is the loophole of "Let's see what others have to say" even though those others are clearly inactive.
Anyone that hasn't logged in since 2013 should be relieved from such a role.
2013 is very long ago. Limit of inactivity should at MAX be one month, unless prior notice.
gajop
Moderator
Posts: 3051
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 20:42

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by gajop »

knorke wrote:
Anyone that hasn't logged in since 2013 should be relieved from such a role.
2013 is very long ago. Limit of inactivity should at MAX be one month, unless prior notice.
I agree, but even with this we would purge 80% of mods/admins.
User avatar
Silentwings
Posts: 3720
Joined: 25 Oct 2008, 00:23

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by Silentwings »

Limit of inactivity should at MAX be one month, unless prior notice.
One month seems very short to me, six sounds more appropriate. Some people have regular workloads irl, for others it goes up and down.
imo: try and error
+1, I'd be happy to help but I think only forum admins can edit groups.
dansan
Server Owner & Developer
Posts: 1203
Joined: 29 May 2010, 23:40

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by dansan »

gajop wrote:I think it's a bit weird that the entire Spring infrastructure is not financed by Spring.
About the server: springrts server rent forum thread.
gajop
Moderator
Posts: 3051
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 20:42

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by gajop »

I removed the information regarding the current status from the etherpad and put it http://springrts.com/wiki/About/Organization .
If you think some of those things can be still discussed (although etherpad seems quiet for a few days), feel free to add that thing back in.
Next we need to decide who'll hold Spring's finances. Seems no one is stepping up..?
Kloot
Spring Developer
Posts: 1867
Joined: 08 Oct 2006, 16:58

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by Kloot »

I will.
abma
Spring Developer
Posts: 3798
Joined: 01 Jun 2009, 00:08

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by abma »

Kloot wrote:I will.
thanks a lot! (added to the wiki)

i've added some stuff to the organization page: buildbot i.e. was missing which is quiet important for development. it already shows a bit how many projects/servers/people rely on each other. :)
gajop
Moderator
Posts: 3051
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 20:42

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by gajop »

Kloot wrote:I will.
Thanks, please add to wiki your PayPal+BitCoin+whatever else account that we can use for donations.
We also need to keep track on all donations, spendings* and status.

*spendings is something we need to find a way to agree on as a community (or find a way how it gets decided).
gajop
Moderator
Posts: 3051
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 20:42

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by gajop »

I've added Anarchid to the SPI liason of "finances" as there have been no direct objections so far and we need to handle it.
The next thing is we need to figure out who decides how Spring money is spent.
Imo a group of around 5 people is required, and I would prefer if they could be chosen by the community, but since we don't have the whole "choosing process" agreed upon yet, I say we should just have people step up on this and we'll see if there are any particular objections.

Please write your name here: http://etherpad.springrts.com/p/organization at the "Treasury" section. Do not nominate other people. If there are more than five who would like to do this, we will organize some polls.

I would suggest that we have at least one person from each important section of the community, in order to represent as many interests as possible.
- Spring engine
- ZK core game developer
- BA core game developer
- 2+ other prominent content developers
- Community leads (I honestly don't think we have such a person, but if anyone is willing to step up, please)
- ..?

The reason why I think we need a set number of people instead of having everyone vote on every issue is because it would be too cumbersome to do so. Still, I would prefer to use a democratic approach to choose those in power.
User avatar
Silentwings
Posts: 3720
Joined: 25 Oct 2008, 00:23

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by Silentwings »

I don't think content developers should have a huge role to play in how Spring spends its money - imo engine/server developers and forum admins are much better placed to do so. This is partly because projects can occasionally "outgrow" Spring, which comes with the danger of non-neutrality, and partly because typically someone who is a content dev doesn't need to be familiar with Springs infrastructure.

So my proposal (up for alteration):
Take decisions on how to spend Springs money in minuted meetings with 1 engine dev, 1 forum admin, 1 server admin and 1 finance person. Finance person has deciding vote if split. Content/etc devs may attend and propose spending, may join in discussion if/when proposals affect them, but don't vote.
User avatar
Jools
XTA Developer
Posts: 2816
Joined: 23 Feb 2009, 16:29

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by Jools »

Forum admins should just be moderating the forum, not be concerned about money. Don't we have enough nepotism already as it is?
raaar
Metal Factions Developer
Posts: 1095
Joined: 20 Feb 2010, 12:17

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by raaar »

gajop wrote:I've added Anarchid to the SPI liason of "finances" as there have been no direct objections so far and we need to handle it.
The next thing is we need to figure out who decides how Spring money is spent.
Imo a group of around 5 people is required, and I would prefer if they could be chosen by the community, but since we don't have the whole "choosing process" agreed upon yet, I say we should just have people step up on this and we'll see if there are any particular objections.

Please write your name here: http://etherpad.springrts.com/p/organization at the "Treasury" section. Do not nominate other people. If there are more than five who would like to do this, we will organize some polls.

I would suggest that we have at least one person from each important section of the community, in order to represent as many interests as possible.
- Spring engine
- ZK core game developer
- BA core game developer
- 2+ other prominent content developers
- Community leads (I honestly don't think we have such a person, but if anyone is willing to step up, please)
- ..?

The reason why I think we need a set number of people instead of having everyone vote on every issue is because it would be too cumbersome to do so. Still, I would prefer to use a democratic approach to choose those in power.
we don't need everyone to vote on every issue. I agree that would be cumbersome and hamper progress.

but there should be polls open to community ocasionally:
- polls to decide on key issues (rare, like one or two per year)
- polls to get feedback from the community on issues (less rare, a few per year)

smart polls help everyone know quantitatively how everyone else feels. That's important. It also helps prevent nepotism (at least when it goes against community will). For each poll, a discussion should be launched first. Both with set deadlines to prevent them from dragging on for too long.

content devs should have a role, but not as part of the deciding group, because of neutrality issues. I think polling the content devs occasionaly would be a good idea. Games with an active community should have higher weight, but not by much (2x, 3x max?).
User avatar
Jools
XTA Developer
Posts: 2816
Joined: 23 Feb 2009, 16:29

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by Jools »

If you talk about doing it in a democratic way, there is no way around letting the people decide. If you have only elected appointed people decide then it is not democratic. Yes, not everyone can have a say in daily affairs or the decision making will be very slow, but like in an association you typically have a governing body but with an annual meeting that controls that governning body. That's how it's done in civilian life.

By the way, when someone says something like:
gajop wrote: I would suggest that we have at least one person from each important section of the community, in order to represent as many interests as possible.
- Spring engine
- ZK core game developer
- BA core game developer
- 2+ other prominent content developers
- Community leads (I honestly don't think we have such a person, but if anyone is willing to step up, please)
- ..?
Then he is not representing the whole community. He is representing zk, ba and '2 other prominent games'.
User avatar
Anarchid
Posts: 1384
Joined: 30 Nov 2008, 04:31

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by Anarchid »

not representing the whole community
Hivemind or nothing? conjoin into the neural demarchy today!

Some decisions might warrant a referendum of all people with actual contributions, but you don't get anywhere if you regularly require coordination of more than 7 people for minute decisions.
User avatar
FLOZi
MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 6241
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 01:14

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by FLOZi »

Silentwings wrote:I don't think content developers should have a huge role to play in how Spring spends its money - imo engine/server developers and forum admins are much better placed to do so. This is partly because projects can occasionally "outgrow" Spring, which comes with the danger of non-neutrality, and partly because typically someone who is a content dev doesn't need to be familiar with Springs infrastructure.

So my proposal (up for alteration):
Take decisions on how to spend Springs money in minuted meetings with 1 engine dev, 1 forum admin, 1 server admin and 1 finance person. Finance person has deciding vote if split. Content/etc devs may attend and propose spending, may join in discussion if/when proposals affect them, but don't vote.

There are only 2 forum admins and one of those is an engine dev.

I'm not saying I wouldn't do it, but I think the contribution of content devs should not be discounted (though deciding which opens a giant can of worms).
User avatar
smoth
Posts: 22309
Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 00:46

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by smoth »

There are always engine decisions that can effect projects but working around them has become a way of life here. Content devs will raise a huge stink if the engine change is bad for them but will tend to get ignored if the devs feel the concern is unwarranted. If the concern is valid, they will address it. I think this should stay that way here.
User avatar
FLOZi
MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 6241
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 01:14

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by FLOZi »

Regardless:

Who are the end users of Spring Engine?

Why should they not have a say in how it's resources are used?

From whence do we expect the overwhelming majority of Bounty contributors?
User avatar
Tim Blokdijk
Posts: 1242
Joined: 29 May 2005, 11:18

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by Tim Blokdijk »

gajop wrote:I've added Anarchid to the SPI liason of "finances" as there have been no direct objections so far and we need to handle it.
The next thing is we need to figure out who decides how Spring money is spent.
Imo a group of around 5 people is required, ...
You are moving to fast for me to back your ideas. Please understand that I have a dayjob and need time to think things over. A lot of your proposals are controversial at best that need *a lot* of discussion. Now don't misunderstand, I do really appreciate that you try to move things forward! I want to help you be effective in that.
But give me some time to at least reply to your pm. Moving to fast with things that are not agreed upon by the people that would need to agree is a sure way to fail.
User avatar
AF
AI Developer
Posts: 20687
Joined: 14 Sep 2004, 11:32

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by AF »

All the social profiles minus Google+

moo
User avatar
Anarchid
Posts: 1384
Joined: 30 Nov 2008, 04:31

Re: SpringRTS Organizational specification

Post by Anarchid »

I think this as good a time as any to breach the SPI issue.

It has been discussed in lobby chat that basically having one individual person rather than an organization to handle the donations, and generally having assets which keep Spring alive in hands of various possibly irreplaceable individuals represents a risk.

The suggested strategy to remedy this situation is to have SpringRTS become an SPI associate project.

Software in Public Interest is one of those legal scaffold organizations in the form of an USA nonprofit. They can handle donations, defend against lawsuits, such stuff. In particular, SPI provide these services to Debian and 0AD, amongst others.

Relevant to the bounty discussion, it seems that 0AD were able to do their crowdfunding campaign with the help of SPI.

So: does anyone actually have issues with, thoughts about, or other ideas about Spring actually becoming an SPI associate project?
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”