As such, the greenlighting policy has been updated: https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/forum/t-10629348/new-draft-forum-policies#post-4183908 to clarify that for the purposes of the greenlighting policy, a successful page is considered so if it is rated above 0/has a positive rating.

The changes are as follows:

• The category formerly called Announcements has been renamed to Sitewide Announcements.
• A new category has been created, titled Page Announcements. This category contains six threads: the announcement threads for SCPs, Tales, GoI Formats, Deletions, Page Updates and Miscellaneous Page Announcements.
• Another new category has been created, this one titled Staff Recruitment. This category is for staff teams to post recruitment threads for new Junior Staff members.

These changes would have meant the "Site Announcements and Proposals" forum group would have contained eight categories, which would have been unwieldly. As such, "Site Announcements and Proposals" has been split into two forum groups:

1. One continuing to use the original name, containing Sitewide Announcements, Page Announcements, Proposals and Policy and Introductions.
2. A second titled "Staff Processes", containing Staff Policy Discussions, Staff Discussion Records, Staff Recruitment and Town Halls.

These changes are purely organizational and made to better manage the presentation of content, and make it easier to find relevant threads.

We will likely be moved old Page Announcements out of the Archived Category and into Page Announcements, keeping the most recent versions pinned and allowing others to sink, as is currently done in the Introductions forum. This will happen over the next few days or weeks, as it is not urgent.

04 Mirror: http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/forum/t-14416714/forum-rearrangement

I would like to get two commanders/mentors for the month if possible (I can be a backup for Flight 2 if/as necessary).

General reminder, quick info for mentors is here: http://05command.wikidot.com/butterfly-flights-reference

I've put my name forward for Flight 2 since I should have some more time next month. I would like to get two more commanders/mentors if possible.

General reminder, quick info for mentors is here: http://05command.wikidot.com/butterfly-flights-reference

1. How long should an author cease-and-desist last? (For comparison, a standard C&D for bad feedback is lifted when the user has written a successful mainsite page. For established authors, it is after they have posted helpful feedback on mainsite discussion threads, requested staff to look over the posts, and staff consensus is to let them post forum critique again.)

Agreeing with a week, but forcing someone to ''say sorry'' isn't really going to be an honest apology anyway, so I don't think it's all that effective. If someone is overly vehement (or displays a pattern of such behaviour), that sounds like an action for Disc instead.

2. How should staff respond if the author ignores the C&D?

Agreeing with Naveil here.

3. Are there any further questions/concerns to address before this becomes standard practice for Forum Crit moving forward?

I can agree with some sentiments above:

I believe we should also consider allowing C&Ds to apply to general misuse and abuse of the forum. If certain authors are repeatedly failing to follow forum guidelines, then they should be temporarily barred from using the ideas forum. In these cases, I believe a simple weeklong C&D is sufficient.

It's really disruptive if someone keeps flailing, doing the wrong thing, spamming threads etc. Having said that, I'm not sure about the effectiveness of additional rules that someone repeatedly demonstrated to ignore anyway. If someone else thinks that a C&D based on floundering in the forums could be effective, I won't be against it or anything, it's just that I don't think it'll be very effective.

2. I'm not exactly familiar with other C&Ds but the precedent seems to be a revoke or a revoke + a short ban. I think the latter is more effective in this case. With that, I'd also suggest that forum C&Ds be used before the traditional revoke we've used in the past for forum misuse. I'm not sure if we'd also like bump standard escalation up a notch if forum misuse continues after a C&D, but a revoke should be fine. In my mind, it goes:

Forum C&D -> C&D ends -> forum misuse continues -> standard escalation
Forum C&D -> C&D is broken -> 1 week ban -> forum misuse continues -> standard escalation following from 1w

Issuing longer C&Ds after the first is an option, but if an author doesn't learn from the first then they likely aren't going to learn from a second.

3. I think flexibility is important. Forum crit is a tricky business and the team should be able give longer (or shorter) C&Ds based on different cases, different ban lengths for breaking one (though half of that is likely Disc's territory), and so forth.

Author C&Ds should last at least a week, and then be lifted when a formal apology is issued to any reviewers to they were vehement to. A week gives them time to reflect, and the apology allows them to make amends with those they were rude to.

2. How should staff respond if the author ignores the C&D?

Same response that other C&Ds would receive. In this case, I believe that's a site ban correct? It feels like the right escalation.

3. Are there any further questions/concerns to address before this becomes standard practice for Forum Crit moving forward?

I believe we should also consider allowing C&Ds to apply to general misuse and abuse of the forum. If certain authors are repeatedly failing to follow forum guidelines, then they should be temporarily barred from using the ideas forum. In these cases, I believe a simple weeklong C&D is sufficient.

As context, there is existing precedent for team-based cease-and-desist actions, for site functions like tagging (if someone repeatedly tags pages incorrectly) and giving forum critique (if someone repeatedly gives problematic, misleading, and/or overly vehement feedback). I don't think these were documented straightforwardly though, since they just sort of emerged as standard practice when staff handled multiple cleanups pertaining to the same individuals.

As this is a team-focused change, I am putting the thread in this category for now. Similar to how previous forum changes were introduced and implemented:

• http://05command.wikidot.com/forum/t-12249918/limit-on-how-many-drafts-an-author-can-ask-for-forum-crit-on (post limits to prevent spam/flooding)
• http://05command.wikidot.com/forum/t-10622425/forum-crit-policy-two-tweaks (greenlighting)
• http://05command.wikidot.com/forum/t-13095778/new-ideas-critique-forum-policies (concept forum template)

If this needs to go to an official proposal and vote, feel free to let me know. In the meantime, I would really appreciate discussion (mostly from Forum Crit; all staff welcome to weigh in!) regarding:

1. How long should an author cease-and-desist last? (For comparison, a standard C&D for bad feedback is lifted when the user has written a successful mainsite page. For established authors, it is after they have posted helpful feedback on mainsite discussion threads, requested staff to look over the posts, and staff consensus is to let them post forum critique again.)

2. How should staff respond if the author ignores the C&D?

3. Are there any further questions/concerns to address before this becomes standard practice for Forum Crit moving forward?

Thanks!

I would like to get at least one more commander if possible, though I totally understand if people would prefer to be on vacation. d:

I'll be taking a Flight 2 slot next month. I would like to get two more commanders if possible.

So far we have one commander listed. I would like to get at least two more commanders for June.

Thus far I am quite pleased with opening up commanderships to greenlighters in general, rather than having it be a staff-only mentorship setup!

I've added your name to Flight 1!