Jump to content
Impulse 9

ThePieSpy for UOTC

Add ThePieSpy to UOTC  

48 members have voted

  1. 1. Add ThePieSpy to UOTC

    • Yes
      45
    • No
      3


Recommended Posts

 

 

After speaking with azzwort I'd like to put my name in for UOTC officer. The current requirements of the office would, in my opinion, benefit from an additional officer to assist organizing training and revamp some of the practices.

My focus would be foremost to run more courses, and to create and run courses informed by the demand and interests of players in the community. I'm not here to start from scratch, but hopefully streamline and improve UOTCs ability to run courses that are of high quality but still relavent to game play.

A bit about myself, I've been with UO since the start, and have been a regular for the majority of that time. I have a particular interest in helping new players and making a tangible impact on players gameplay on the server. I've written a few guides over the years and contribute towards the knowledge base on the wiki.

Feel free to ask me any questions about my intent or goals for UOTC.

This poll requires a simple majority lasting two weeks, ending on 2018-09-27.

This poll was put up at Regular Request.

Share this post


Link to post

I am kinda 50/50 on this.

Please do not become semi-absent as well.

Cut your streamlining to what is healthy to the task of the office, not what you personally prefer. We had enough of that shit in the past years.

 

How are you gonna deal with the issue of time intensive workload Vs motivation and available workpower of 'active' personal?

Share this post


Link to post

Pie is an excellent member of the community and has been active since the beginning. He has spoken to me and I very much support his decision to volunteer for this role.

 

Voting yes.

Share this post


Link to post

Having been filled in regarding the discussion by azzwort, and knowing pie as I do, there is not a doubt in my mind that his input is invaluable to UOTC. Yes wholeheartedly.

Share this post


Link to post

I am kinda 50/50 on this.

Please do not become semi-absent as well.

Cut your streamlining to what is healthy to the task of the office, not what you personally prefer. We had enough of that shit in the past years.

 

How are you gonna deal with the issue of time intensive workload Vs motivation and available workpower of 'active' personal?

Work power and motivation means adding more delegates and seeing where we can improve the way courses and lesson plans are written. I believe part of the issue lies in the desire to get things perfect the first time that stagnates development. Motivation should ideally come from actually running the courses and receiving positive feedback from players and a noticible improvement on the server gameplay.

 

It also means finding instructors who have an interest in a particular topic and letting them run with that, while still keeping it relavent enough to interest potential attendees and condensed enough to be practical.

 

Finally I believe we are sometimes too reliant on scripted exercises and complex missions, both of which excessively draw out development time. ArmA is an awesome sandbox that can very easily dynamically create scenarios, that will be more interesting and practical to gameplay on the server.

 

As far as availability, while I am more limited to weekends now, I like to think I'm still easy to get a hold of during the week, and can be more hands on in the evenings.

Edited by ThePieSpy

Share this post


Link to post

Pie has assisted me and others in developing, producing and running high quality training events and content, and would make a great training officer.

 

Yes.

Edited by zumorc

Share this post


Link to post

Pie is indeed good people, and he is doing good work with the ITC stuff. I can think of few people better suited, but for both my own due diligence and to play the advocate for a moment. 

 

You are already creating training content as a delegate of the office, what is preventing you from delivering this content as a delegate that you will be enabled to do as an officer ?

 

What is your position in the discussion that has been ongoing regarding long format formalised courses vs shorter more direct ad-hoc training ? 

Share this post


Link to post

Pie is indeed good people, and he is doing good work with the ITC stuff. I can think of few people better suited, but for both my own due diligence and to play the advocate for a moment. 

 

You are already creating training content as a delegate of the office, what is preventing you from delivering this content as a delegate that you will be enabled to do as an officer ?

 

What is your position in the discussion that has been ongoing regarding long format formalised courses vs shorter more direct ad-hoc training ? 

 

Ad-hoc will always be my preference. Much like the real military, college, and the professional world, long drawn out powerpoints and lecture heavy instruction is ineffective and inefficient. Nobody comes here to treat ArmA like a day job, they do it because it is enjoyable. My goal is to improve player competency with actual practical skills rather than knowledge retention. 

 

The desire to do this from an officer's standpoint versus a delegate is to reduce the workload from the existing officer's and hopefully reduce some of the tension between the office and some of the players in the community. I have already spoken with azzwort about some of my ideas regarding better project management methods to track course development and get resources and help to those who wish to develop new courses and guides or improve old ones.

 

For example, looking through the "UOTC Handbook" on the wiki, it is a document with 17 separate sections. It is also very specific to a particular doctrine in some sections. Putting myself in the shoes of a new player, this is not a document I would see myself seriously taking the time to read through if I wanted to simply hop on the server during prime time for the first time. This is not to say the authors are wrong in attempting to be as comprehensive as possible, but I think we could use a different perspective into the actual impact the document is having towards it's intended audience.

 

Put simply, right now we have two officers that balance the work here with real-life commitments and other interests, including one that is double tasked in two offices. I'm not one to complain about a problem without at least attempting to help alleviate it, which I think i can best do from an officer position.

Edited by ThePieSpy

Share this post


Link to post

Concerning your last post:

 

It seems that you have pretty setup ideas about your process of streamlining and instruction around UO. Which I see no issues with as long as they do not become a dogma of salvation.

 

I am all for the streamlining, but I do have heavy concerns when it comes to restructuring how we develop and deliver knowledge through courses.

Especially because I haven't seen you in action when it comes to instruction and I have no picture of your performance of being able to instruct at all combined with the fact that UOTC went through 3 phases of radical changes to (if I look at what you describe) be back to quagmire square one that UOTC spend years to get out of. I am kinda failing to see how this exactly is going to be productive.

 

Another thing that concerns me is your sentence about established education and the, for you obvious, superiority of 'Ad-Hoc Education'.

Please describe what this 'Ad-Hoc Education' would look like from your POV and in which points its application with UOTC would be superior to the current 50/50 model (50% theory + 50% hands on) we aim for.

Share this post


Link to post

Just in case you missed them:

I know you gonna get the job, but I would really appreciate a bit of elaboration.

Concerning your last post:

 

It seems that you have pretty setup ideas about your process of streamlining and instruction around UO. Which I see no issues with as long as they do not become a dogma of salvation.

 

I am all for the streamlining, but I do have heavy concerns when it comes to restructuring how we develop and deliver knowledge through courses.

Especially because I haven't seen you in action when it comes to instruction and I have no picture of your performance of being able to instruct at all combined with the fact that UOTC went through 3 phases of radical changes to (if I look at what you describe) be back to quagmire square one that UOTC spend years to get out of. I am kinda failing to see how this exactly is going to be productive.

 

Another thing that concerns me is your sentence about established education and the, for you obvious, superiority of 'Ad-Hoc Education'.

Please describe what this 'Ad-Hoc Education' would look like from your POV and in which points its application with UOTC would be superior to the current 50/50 model (50% theory + 50% hands on) we aim for.

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry for my delay. I want to try to get together with those who remain active in UOTC to identify what exactly is being worked on. My intent isn't to scrap things that are already complete or near completion. However if something has been sitting in limbo for a year, I will take action to either get it rolling or scrap it for something more streamlined and deliverable. After which additional work can done as needed.

 

Once again, there seems to be this prevailing rumor I'm here to push out the current officers and instructors. This is NOT the case, so please stop asking. My intent is to assist the existing officers and instructors, and ideally bring in even more.

 

As far as the preference towards lecture vs in-game practice, I will reaffirm that I prefer players to be taking part in the latter whenever possible. Often they can be done in tandem, given the environment a game provides versus real life.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...