A potential improvement concerning the management of Request Threads

[The_Foolish_Omniscient_Guy]

I thought about a more organized way to manage the Request Threads: The one who does a calculation, evaluates a calculation or renders an image should give a Kudo to a request in order to say to others persons that he is doing the service requested. This way, the others members of the Calculation Group and Image Helpers won't waste their time doing a request that is going to be done and they will be able to distinguish more easily what request hasn't been taken into account.

This improvement would apply for the process to respond at the following Request Threads:

Calculation Request: A member ask for a calculation. By giving a Kudo to this request, everyone can see who has done or who is going to do the calculation and take another request that has no Kudos.

Calculation Evaluation Request: A member ask for a evaluation. By giving a Kudo to this request, everyone can see who has evaluated the calculation and viewing the number of Kudos on a request as the number of evaluations (one Kudo means one evaluation from a Calculation Group member, two Kudos mean two evaluations from a Calculation Group member, etc...).

Image Renders Request: A member ask for a render of an image. By giving a Kudo to this request, everyone can see who is going to do or who has done the render and take another render request that has no Kudos.

If this idea is approved, then a new rule would potentially be needed concerning Kudos on Request Threads: Only people who intend to respond to a request can give a Kudo to this same request in order to distinguish who is working on the request.

 

[GyroNutz]

I think quoting and replying to the message would be better. Someone who is unaware of the rule may kudos a message which may leave a calculation/image request to be buried. Also, older messages with kudos on them may also be ignored.

Either this or a rule for a user to edit their original message once their calculation has been accepted.

 

[Antvasima]

GyroNutz's idea seems more practical, yes.

 

[The_Divine_Phoenix]

I don't see this as necessary, if you've agreed to do a calc, you should reply to that request. Calcs getting evaluated by multiple people is not a bad thing, it's encouraged even, so it's not needed there.

The only one I could remotely see this applying to is the image renders thread, as renders are quick enough to make that most people don't reply saying that they will do this before doing it themselves, but even then, two people picking up the same one is not very common.

 

[The_Foolish_Omniscient_Guy]

@GyroNutz

I've thought about kudos because it is less cumbersome for the threads

@The Divine Phoenix

For the Calculation Request, i don't see many reply of someone agreeing to the do a calc so this is why i included this thread, but this is certainly because there is not many member who want to do the calculations requested in that thread.

For the Calculation Evaluation Thread, i don't see either many reply of a Calc Group member evaluating the calc even tough they actually do. There is no notifications in Blog Post so this is why i thought about applying the idea for this thread. But i agree that in that case, it is more practical to quoting and replying to the message.

For the Image Render Request, i still think Kudos is more appropriated because it is less cumbersome for the thread.

 

[The_Divine_Phoenix]

In regards to the image renders thread, almost nobody ever says "I will make a render of this" or anything of the sort, they just reply with the render itself, the only thing that kind of system would serve to do is prevent 2 people from working on the same thing, which is already uncommon enough as is to not be worth the trouble.

 

[Antvasima]

TDP is probably correct.

 

[The_Foolish_Omniscient_Guy]

More input would be needed.

 

[Skalt711]

I think that The Divine Phoenix makes sense.