|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 6:54 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 10:53 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 6:29 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 8:23 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 11:18 am
|
|
|
|
Deoridhe What would be the standards for what got into the dictionary and how would the appeals process work to take out inaccurate information? My offering:
Setup:
A subforum would be created, with an Announcement thread for the procedure/rules of entry.A Sticky would be created with the current reference status (current accepted entries and their associated data in separate posts), modifiable only by Guild staff.
Standards:Proposals: For each new entry, a new thread will be created by the person suggesting the entry, with sufficient data as outlined below.Support: All entries must be backed with a source, unless the term is endemic to the PFRC or the forums.Terminology: Entries with only one source may only use the terminology from that source; entries utilizing multiple sources can attempt to composite the information into a coherent mass.
Challenges:
Challenges to Sources: Sources may be challenged on their merits.Challenges to Wording: If an entry utilizes information from multiple sources, the composition of that information may be challenged on grounds of accuracy, readability, and utility.
Procedure:
Dead-Source Clause:If a proposed entry's entire corpus of sources has been successfully challenged, leaving the entry with no utilizable sources, the entry is considered effectively "dead" until such time as a new utilizable source is found.Acceptance:If no challenges are outstanding on an entry for a determined amount of time, and Guild staff (or other appointed quorum) agrees by majority that the entry stands worthy of acceptance into the PFRC reference, the entry shall be added with its most current living sources and accepted terminology to the primary reference thread; the proposal thread will then be locked.Right of Refusal: The Guild staff (or other appointed quorum) reserves the right to refuse to accept any entry for lack of utility or other merit to the Guild reference. Upon such an event, the proposal thread will be locked.Ex Post Facto Challenges: Any challenges to accepted reference entries shall be addressed to an appointed member, or group of members, of the Guild staff (or other appointed quorum).Appeal of Refusal:Any appeal of refusal shall be addressed to an appointed member, or group of members, of the Guild staff (or other appointed quorum).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 11:46 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 5:12 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 5:52 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 1:08 pm
|
|
|
|
Henry Dorsett Case SonarP o.o Wow...I didn't think my idea would actually be a good thing. Nothing good comes from fluffs who are still learning anything, anyway... I don't know what I can give, but anything I find, I'll throw up and see what's good and what isn't. Well, I can't say that I could really see how a well-regulated common reference could do anything but benefit the guild as a whole. Then again, vocal b*****d though I may be, I'm not staff and the inimitable Nuri still has final say, my bureaucratic tendencies notwithstanding.
Personally, I'm not going to take on any new projects until AFTER the wedding. I have no problem with the talk at this point. And I like the idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 6:16 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2007 11:39 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:23 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:21 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|