Accepted [Website & Forums Suggestion] Publish Staff Contract Guidelines

In Game Name:

Nicit6​

What part of EcoCityCraft is this suggestion for:

Website & Forums​

Short title for your suggestion:

Publish Staff Contract Guidelines​

What are you suggesting:

The existing internal guidelines for contracts be moved to the Contracts forum.​

Why is this a good addition for EcoCityCraft?:

Contracts are meant to be a more secure form of trading. However, almost every senior player on ECC will avoid them if at all possible. This makes deals less secure.

Allowing players to see exactly what guidelines staff will hold contracts to ensures:
- Players will write contracts more likely to be approved, because they actually know what staff are looking for.
- Players can give feedback on said guidelines, to ensure contracts run smoothly.
- Players are likely to see contracts as less of a hassle, since there won't be unexpected changes.

Of course, I can see a couple arguments against this, including:
"Staff are allowed to deviate from the guidelines, and this will cause players to question when they do".
This is a feature, not a bug. When deviating from any guideline, staff need to be prepared to explain why they did so. Whether the explanation is provided to the players, or administration, it has to exist. If staff are deviating from guidelines and cannot provide a sufficient explanation, it's likely they shouldn't be deviating in the first place.

"These are internal to staff and shouldn't be exposed to players, what's next, public punishment guidelines?".
Unlike punishments, which remain ostensibly private, nothing with contracts is private. Every player can see every contract which is approved and every reason why a contract is denied. Everything in these guidelines is eventually visible to the whole community, so there's no reason for them to be private.​

Other information:

​

Plugin or custom addition:

​

One suggestion per form:

I Understand.​

 

I literally confirmed with staff prior to posting this suggestion that such a thread exists.

If staff, let alone senior staff, aren't reading it then I can see the issue.