The need for change.

[Frank_Hawk]

The current process in place for introducing changes is non-existent in the Argonath community and as a whole needs a revamp to the way we introduce change. The current process in place may be a deliberate attempt to shield our view into the future, but I see this as disengaging if we seek to encourage wider participation and agreement into the future.

The current process seems to be the following:
-   A player raised an idea
-   The idea is debated on with an open forum
-   The idea is picked up, on discretion by a developer
-   No change management / delivery methodology is applied
-   The idea is developed and put into production (current game version)
-   The originating player who raised the idea has no transparency for approved change

The disadvantages of this are:
-   No transparency in the process of introducing changes
-   Developers are allowed to ‘cherry pick’ changes which fit their ambitions
-   There is no prioritisation list of changes needed (i.e. top 20 list of changes)
-   Conflict with influential factions in the community

We need to encourage participation and introduce changes through wider buy in. I’m not sure where this concept came from, but from an IT perspective it is disastrous decision to allow developers to introduce changes into the builds without agreement from users. We have seen examples of this in the past (i.e. setting posts and barriers without former consent). Therefore, I suggest we introduce some change management principles and delivery methodology.

Proposed business process for introducing changes:
-   A player raised an idea
-   The idea is debated on with an open forum
-   A committee of representatives, chaired by and selected by owners debate on the idea
-   The idea is functionally modelled (i.e. activity flow and user interface creation)
-   From the step above, the idea is documented, so it’s ready for a developer to work from
-   The committee vote to approve or reject the idea
                             - If the vote is passed, the idea is signed off by replying committee to topic
                             - If the vote is failed, the idea is rejected by replying committee explaining why
-   The idea is slotted into a top 10 list (for starters) of prioritised ideas
-   The top 10 list is determined and voted on by the committee with agreement to shuffle
-   Developers are encouraged to deliver changes from the list ( top downwards)
-   Developers must code according to the idea documentation
-   Developers check their code with another developer
-   The change is checked into a code branch ready for release
-   The lifecycle repeats

Benefits of the above:
-   Players have transparency in the process of introducing changes
-   Developers are not allowed to ‘cherry pick’ changes unless explicitly agreed by owners
-   Players have a voice in which changes are introduced to the community
-   There is a prioritised list of changes
-   A change management / delivery methodology is applied
-   Greater likelihood of buy in from influential factions

The proposed delivery flow can be summarised in the following from a business and IT perspective:

-   Requirements engineering
                - Ideas are captured, analysed and validated
-   Prioritisation of changes
                - Ideas are prioritised according to priority, severity and business benefit
-   Design
                - Ideas are functionally designed with a relevant checklist for developers
                - This checklist can contain for e.g. assumptions, design notes, UI modelling
-   Development
                - Developers can work from the design stage to formulate code to match requirement
-   Testing
                - Players given transparency of changes, are actively involved in testing changes
                - This will reduce the likelihood of defects when in production
-   Deployment
                - Developers will have a structured way of delivering changes into production
-   Maintenance
                - Defects are resolved and further business benefits are scoped and lifecycle repeats
 
I know that many of you will read the above with a pinch of salt and validity to apply – however, it needs to be understood that we have a lot of talented individuals in this community who are not/no longer teenagers but professionals in their respective fields. I understand that people help in this community through their own spare time and that we should not be introducing formalities which cause bureaucracy but it's also our responsibility to provide structure.  We need to start producing a common approach not only for improving our community, but also building real life applicable skills. The proposed idea I’m suggesting above is in line with real life IT principles which have been watered down. Some may argue that strategically this is not the best approach, but I can assure my suggestion can be altered to accommodate transparency from competing communities.

If the owners want people to take responsibility for the steer of the community, the opportunity needs to present to those willing to take steer with direction. There is real opportunity here for those, not only passionate for the community but also for those who want to learn real life/job skills.

Please share your opinions.

[Gandalf]

Revamping old suggestions ?  :poke:

With the arrival of RS5 the way ideas are reaching the owners and scripting team is going to be changed.
This will ensure that the current way where bad ideas are repeated constantly, and good ideas seem to be held in limbo is changted in to a system that as you descrbied will both filter better and offer more transparency.

However creating the concept of RS5 has shown once again that revolutionar ideas that are not present on other servers are almost never to be found in the ideas section. People take ideas from elsewhere and present it here.

This is also the pitfall of any such concept, the person 'credited' is not sure to have been the original inventor of the idea.

[rJCaiG]

Except for the fact that this is not the players' server, and is actually the server of the Owners. Nothing gets scripted into the game without their approval, and they have always been active in looking at SA:MP ideas subforum.
Therefore, from that we can draw that the way this server is intended to be run - with the owners taking charge of all decisions as it's their server - is indeed working and should continue as such, as it is this that has allowed Argonath to cement its place and thrive as one of Argonath's best servers.