Staffing Not being a lone administrator

[Elena 546]

After a discussion with @Gothams Reckoning here, I told him that a discussion about staffing a site is more suitable in the forum. 

 

Quote

you feel that you are not sharing the story with anyone if you do not have a co-administrator. What makes you feel as though having a co-administrator validates the sharing experience instead of just having members, for example?

 

I think, ultimately, it is a matter of preference and control. Some want to share, some want to keep all control for themselves. I want to share.

 

I knew sites with only one administrator and one moderator (or no moderator at all) which were doing well, and sites with several who were doing well. And the same thing for the same numbers, who weren't doing well. I think it is a matter of investment in the story.  Sharing the duties and sharing the fun is the best, so that nobody gets tired or overwhelmed.  A site having a few core people invested in it from the beginning, has activity which lures other members to join and has the chance to last more, because it has already a core of interested/ enthusiastic people. And this is what I am needing, in general, first and foremost. A second (or third) staff member is needed because hopefully people don't get busy at the same time, because then there is a serious problem among the staff...  I think that two people staffing a site can write among themselves and create activity until others join.  It is also wonderful when there is one staff member in an opposite timezone, to be there when the other isn't. Staffing a RPG is a volunteering job, which shouldn't take all one's free time. Also, if somebody doesn't want to do a certain task (such as advertising or commenting on bios) nobody can force her to, as long as she contributes with other needed tasks. And I think that involving more people, with more focused responsibilities, avoids burn-out and, at the same time, helps with the community spirit (being invested, a feeling of belonging, of ownership... of being important and meaningful, something like this enhances motivation to help.)

 

Sometimes, when my staff is busy, I feel overwhelmed with doing too much myself and not receiving enough feedback, at least (when I would have preferred concrete help too, not only feedback). Sometimes it feels lonely that I don't have even to whom to ask an opinion (timezones adding to it, but not only this) and I think this is the worst part. They all know that I’ll manage somehow, I always do – but for how long? Everybody sees the site survives without their help… but I am always saying that I need help, because I really feel I shouldn't do it alone! And if everyone pitched in, nobody would feel tired and overwhelmed, because it would be little to do for everyone.

 

Many people judge the number of staff only from the point of view of the number of members, and think that staff duty is only to approve bios and to update lists, needing access to the control panels. There is so much which gets overlooked - the research, the plots, the creation of events.... And we are all people who have a life outside the board too, one wouldn't need to get overwhelmed with duties. A few responsibilities that one  can perform while still having time to write. The number of staff shouldn't depend on the number of characters and members, because there are sites for which, no matter how many members/ characters are there, the staff has certain tasks to perform anyway. Or even more tasks if there aren't too many characters/ members, because they have to replace /complement for the missing ones too (eg NPC-ing their role). I found that most tasks have to be done when the site has 4 members equally as when it has 30 members, and most of them don't even require access to panels (except the coding and graphics staff, who of course needs access to administration panel). One needs writing NPCs, researching, leading stories, writing chronicles and lore., no matter how many or how few members you have. And mostly this is what I need help with/ sharing tasks with. 

You said also why not members? I would have loved if all members wanted to help as if they were staff, everyone with what they love doing:  some with advertising, some with leading a thread or another, some with writing NPCs, some with writing articles for the monthly chronicle.  And at the same time, if people want to help, why not be appointed as staff, in charge with the thing they want to help, just to make it official and their work recognized? This doesn't mean access at the control panel. It means their names listed among the staff, eventually (not necessarily) the names on a different colour, or a title below them.

Edited February 20, 2017 by Elena

[Morrigan 1,826]

I don't necessarily think that all solo admins are that way because they want all of the control. Trust me when I say that When I run a site solo it isn't because I want to. I love sharing the responsibility of running a site however, like you said, I don't want to be the only one creating content. I've found, more often than not, when I accept someone into my site to help me run it, it ends up that all I have is a title chaser. Someone that wants to say they are staff on a site but don't put in any of the work and if it becomes successful they help run it. I find these people more daunting because now I'm chasing after them and still have to do my own tasks. So having people under you or there to assist you is not always as uplifting as one may want.

 

I personally have found that solo adminning can be daunting only if you make it so. I personally have mitigated the amount of jobs I have to do to make it easier on me anyways. Lists are not something that I update if I can help it, ever.

 

Now the writing I can understand. It's definitely not fun coming up with all of the plots and things by yourself. I love to have someone to bounce ideas off of. This is why I have RP partners. Even if they aren't particularly interested in the sites I play on I always have someone to bounce ideas off of and inspire me and help me. They may not write anything for me but when I need help fleshing out an idea they are always there for me.

 

@Elena

[VirusZero 176]

I would love to have staff to help me. But getting staff that actually helps is extremely tough indeed. Like Morrigan put it, many just want the idea of being staff and having that title but not having any responsibility that also goes with said title. Plus many who say they'll help just vanish without helping.

 

And yeah there are ways to take some strain off, but that doesn't mean all of it is gone. 

 

As a result there are times when I feel pretty overwhelmed with no one to turn to or ask for help. Especially on days where my schedule is basically work, more work then crash. So yeah I'd love to have a co-admin or mod to help take some of the burden off. To help fill in the gaps and do things that either I'm not so good at anyway or can't do because I'm too busy right then. Plus it'd be nice to have someone to bounce ideas off. But will I get staff? Hard to say. I have had no luck with staff searches on every external site I've tried (not surprisingly). Even on site I've had no luck, no one wants to take that extra responsibility. 

[Elena 546]

I agree with you that there are many people who do not want the responsibility, or who say yes but vanish. This was why I could never find a co-administrator for my Viking site, and why it never got opened. Because I do not think I can and I should do it alone, either. It would be a sure recipe for burnout. 

 

At the same time, it seems that many people still want the responsibility, since new sites are opened every week. Yes, some of them do not last, when staff discovers it is hard work. And there is no magic solution, unfortunately.

[Kit the Human 759]

7 hours ago, Morrigan said:

I don't necessarily think that all solo admins are that way because they want all of the control. (...)

 

I personally have found that solo adminning can be daunting only if you make it so. I personally have mitigated the amount of jobs I have to do to make it easier on me anyways. Lists are not something that I update if I can help it, ever.

 

Now the writing I can understand. It's definitely not fun coming up with all of the plots and things by yourself. 

 

Pretty much what Morrigan said!

 

I'm a sole admin because I dont need a co-admin. I can muddle along with anything that requires ACP access myself. 

 

I also don't have a single list that needs upkeep nor do I have any kind of activity check. Also no apps! Further, members can sort themselves into the appropriate usergroup.

 

The stuff that members can't do for themselves, I've also got mods to help me cover me on days I can't get on the forum. If they can't get to it? That's cool, it doesn't stop anyone from jumping in and RPing.

 

So mitigating your workload is a great help for solo admins. But I also appreciate that you (Elena) have a very strong vision in how you want your forum to run and what you do and don't want to do, and that's cool. There's only so much one person can achieve in a day and sometimes getting a co-admin is the best way to achieve your ends.

 

But oh man the creative burn out is real, I envy any sole admin who can just keep coming up with story and can write beautiful docs to introduce new members to the world. I really can't (yet!) so I am eternally grateful to the wonderfully proactive, talented and creative folk who have joined my forum.

 

So no real advice there! But rest-assured, not all sole admins are greedily holding control of the story. Generally, I expect they can handle everything that requires ACP access. Mods and members who can help out creatively? They are treasures.

[Josie 198]

I see that we have philosophical differences over what a staff member is and should be.

 

My personal view of what an admin should be is just another member who has some extra responsibilities. As an admin, I never want to set myself apart from my members and in fact have gone so far as to have staff usernames colored the same as member usernames because- even on that level- I want us to be the same and have the same responsibilities to the forum and story, even if we do not all have jobs a staff member has. I believe a forum and a story belongs to everyone involved, not just the admin and staff, and so everyone's responsibilities are the same. A member might not go out and advertise for the forum, but by being present and posting they are doing something just as (if not more) important for the site, for example.

 

But I don't feel like my initial question was answered, so that's what I'm going to touch on here from my own perspective.

 

Quote

What makes you feel as though having a co-administrator validates the sharing experience instead of just having members, for example?

 

I try to approach staffing much in the same way I do creating a character: I never create a character that relies on someone else's character in order to be played. If the person I'm playing with drops off the face of the planet, then I can still pick that character up and move on. It's, of course, always great when other people do want to play with the character! It makes me very happy, and I have a lot of fun. It's, of course, what I would prefer. But if that doesn't happen, it's no big deal.

 

But it has nothing to do with wanting power, or not wanting to share. A character alone with no interactions does not gain any power, only dust. A character with no interactions is not being shared. This is not the ideal position for a character to be in, so it is important to be able to move the character forward on your own.

 

I feel that the same approach can and should be taken to a site. But that is how I am as a person. If no one else is willing to help me Get The Thing Done, then I will do it myself. I do not let other people (or a lack of them) get in the way of me achieving my goals and do what makes me happy.

 

Which is why I don't feel that having a co-administrator or other staff members are necessary for a sharing experience.

 

I don't feel that the story should be only an admin effort and in fact feel that an admin team entirely directing the story is the opposite of sharing in the sense that you seem to mean, but perhaps I misunderstand your meaning. The way I interpret a staff team coming up with all the story and then "sharing" it with the members is much the same way I see someone making a movie and then "sharing" it with viewers. The movie's done by the time you see it, and any input you have on it will go towards a future project (maybe) instead of actively change anything that already happened in the movie.

 

In my games, I like to leave a lot up to the players to decide where things will go. I have my own characters with their ambitions, and I will further a story through them- but I do not have end goals in mind for a site's story overall, simply the end goals of my characters. With enough players with this mindset, the story can get very far on its own and only needs occasional admin involvement to introduce new possibilities or to keep things within the bounds of the setting.

 

I feel that I get more sharing done by opening up a forum without the staff team that I want and need than I would if I kept things on hold until I had all of the right people sign on to the project to help me. Which leads around, again, to me not feeling like a co-administrator validates the sharing experience at all. 

 

Branching off of my question and on towards your topic, @Elena...

 

None of this is to say that I think having a staff team, asking for help, or presenting a story vs. sharing a story is bad. 

 

However, even when I have had a staff team I've experienced burnout. I've experienced all the things mentioned above by @Morrigan, for example- having to chase after people to get their work done, which, for me, is more stressful than just doing the work myself. I've asked for help and have gotten none, which is more disheartening and hurtful than never having anyone ask to help in the first place. And in letting members entirely run a story, I've been left with more loose ends than I know what to do with.

 

My method of adminning is not perfect, I'm not perfect, and I'm not trying to convert anyone to this way of thinking. Everyone has different needs, wants, and expectations with their forum experiences, and I find it commendable that you know exactly what yours are.

[Elena 546]

I thought I have replied to your question that it is a matter of involvement. From the definition, staff members are more involved than regular members (who, unfortunately, in my experience, lots of them want to be entertained instead of actually writing reliably a story with us).  Being staff means a bit more work and responsibility, but also a feeling of belonging, of ownership... of being important and meaningful, which enhances motivation. A site having a few core people invested in it from the beginning, has activity which lures other members to join and has the chance to last more. (And you have seen a lot of sites starting with 2-3 people building it together and writing actively until the others can join). I think I cannot reply any clearer, I think I used the best English words for what I mean.

 

I would have loved if all members wanted to help as if they were staff, everyone with what they love doing:  some with advertising, some with leading a thread or another, some with writing NPCs, some with writing articles for the monthly chronicle. Actually, this would be the ideal situation, and I was a member (and advertising moderator) of such a site. @Morrigan might remember "Beat to Quarters". I was the one who advertised because I loved this and I loved helping welcome the new members, integrate them into the story. I was doing this, voluntarily, long before being appointed officially advertising moderator. I also contributed actively in writing NPCs - but everyone did it there - with research and plotting, while on some sites it is said "if you want a NPC, write him yourself" and you can't get anyone else to do it.

 

Quote

Having to chase after people to get their work done, which, for me, is more stressful than just doing the work myself. I've asked for help and have gotten none, which is more disheartening and hurtful than never having anyone ask to help in the first place. And in letting members entirely run a story, I've been left with more loose ends than I know what to do with.

 

It had happened to me too, both from regular members and staff members. 

 

Quote

I try to approach staffing much in the same way I do creating a character: I never create a character that relies on someone else's character in order to be played. If the person I'm playing with drops off the face of the planet, then I can still pick that character up and move on. It's, of course, always great when other people do want to play with the character! It makes me very happy, and I have a lot of fun. It's, of course, what I would prefer. But if that doesn't happen, it's no big deal.

But it has nothing to do with wanting power, or not wanting to share. A character alone with no interactions does not gain any power, only dust. A character with no interactions is not being shared. This is not the ideal position for a character to be in, so it is important to be able to move the character forward on your own.

 

I feel that the same approach can and should be taken to a site. But that is how I am as a person. If no one else is willing to help me Get The Thing Done, then I will do it myself. I do not let other people (or a lack of them) get in the way of me achieving my goals and do what makes me happy.

 

 

These are 2 in one - about creating a site and creating a character, and i mostly agree with you, but with a little spin.

 

I agree with you that if something has to be done and nobody does it (and I know how - because for graphics and coding I don't know how and I think it is too difficult to me), I do it alone. I always have. It can be done (and it is done) for one site, where I have staff but not always available (and this is normal, especially for someone working in the military).

 

However, I couldn't run a second site alone. "I do not let other people (or a lack of them) get in the way of me achieving my goals and do what makes me happy." - I ultimately did it alone too, the only way i could do it alone, and I showed you the result: a published Viking-themed story, with the characters and setting I wanted to write in the RPG too.  

 

As for creating characters - I am creating them based on their role in the story. If they are needed in the story, they have something to do, they are created. This, too, isn't relying on someone else's character because if I want to tell a story, I can tell it with a NPC or with another character of mine. And I agree that no character is irreplaceable - in nearly seven years I have lost enough character connections with people vanishing, and I always succeeded to make them matter, but to have my character survive and get stronger from the experience.

 

Quote

The way I interpret a staff team coming up with all the story and then "sharing" it with the members is much the same way I see someone making a movie and then "sharing" it with viewers. The movie's done by the time you see it, and any input you have on it will go towards a future project (maybe) instead of actively change anything that already happened in the movie.

In my games, I like to leave a lot up to the players to decide where things will go.

 

 

I am not saying about presenting a story like one presented a movie. It doesn't happen like this. All of us are writing the story, and encouraged to decide where it will go. Input is always asked before and during the story. It is highly encouraged that the members have an input in the planning, but unfortunately not always it actually happens. Each plot is discussed by the whole involved faction, and everyone is expected to come with ideas... but often only some people do, or only one except me. And there were also cases when, for lack of active participation at refining the plot from my staff and members, I had to do it with likeminded people from outside the site (Usually Sharpie from Show the Colours, or reenactors from a pirate reenacting site, closed now). 

 

I keep asking regularly, everyone, "Which story would inspire you to write more regularly and more enthusiastically? Which story do you want to write? You can propose anything, and we'll discuss how to adapt all the proposals into something coherent." Most of the time only a few people actually reply and give ideas. Others, after not replying and being directly asked in PMs afterwards, reply with "Anything. Throw anything at my character." Well, if I wanted to throw anything, instead of writing a story, I would have gone in the park and play fetch with a dog! It doesn't work like this! ☹️  I want you to be an active part into the story. If nothing inspires you... then what are you doing here?

 

Others reply, give ideas and we further refine them to their satisfaction. They are encouraged to lead the plot or to actively participate, if they have required it. But when the time comes, they don't even post there, limiting themselves just to read (or not even). It has happened, several times, so then up to me and 1-2 others to write a story where all the characters would have made sense to be involved. Involve your members, indeed! Then no wonder that the final result might be, in some circumstances, feeling cheated.

 

@Gothams Reckoning

Edited February 21, 2017 by Elena

[Josie 198]

@Elena, I think I understand where our misunderstanding is coming from.

 

It appears that we also have a different perception of what "sharing" is and means. If I am understanding you correctly, the "sharing" you are speaking about is actually a bond that forms between the staff members over caring for and maintaining a site. You do not feel that you can have this same bond with just regular members, and that bond (and sharing it) is something you do not want to admin a site without.

 

I agree that it can be a nice bond to have. How essential it is is and who we can have that bond with is where our opinions diverge, and that's okay.

[Elena 546]

@Gothams Reckoning,sharing the work makes it fun and less tiresome for everyone, while sharing the fun in parallel too. It gives feelings of achievement, belonging, investment in the story and the community. If the members would have wanted this bond (and there are sites where they do), then virtually any member could be staff. Because staff doesn't necessarily mean access the control panel, but have responsibility in the story and in the community part. And I would love this, but it doesn't happen often. I told you, I was on a site where it happened. Everybody researched, everybody plotted actively, everybody wrote NPCs. I was the only one who loved advertising, but others advertised from time to time too. That site (which lasted 2 years, but ultimately finished its story because we had remained few and these happened to get busy at the same time) didn't have a chronicle: I think one is necessary both for story purposes and for community purposes, so I care about one too.

Edited February 21, 2017 by Elena

[xexes 108]

I keep asking regularly, everyone, "

Which story would inspire you to write more regularly and more enthusiastically? Which story do you want to write? You can propose anything, and we'll discuss how to adapt all the proposals into something coherent." Most of the time only a few people actually reply and give ideas. Others, after not replying and being directly asked in PMs afterwards, reply with "Anything. Throw anything at my character." Well, if I wanted to throw anything, instead of writing a story, I would have gone in the park and play fetch with a dog! It doesn't work like this!   I want you to be an active part into the story. If nothing inspires you... then what are you doing here?

 

Sometimes people just genuinely don't have any ideas or plain old suck at ideas (ironic to be a roleplayer, though, I know!). Sometimes it's that they're content with where they are at. Usually, they're just not that invested.

 

It can be frustrating to have mismatched investments, especially where reliability is needed, but roleplaying is a hobby and this is the world we live in. : - S

[Dusty 55]

3 hours ago, xexes said:

 

Sometimes people just genuinely don't have any ideas or plain old suck at ideas (ironic to be a roleplayer, though, I know!). 

 

I have rp'd with quite a few that love the idea of things but aren't able to contribute anything of much substance themselves.  They like to ride on the coattails of other player's ideas and tend to need to be guided each step.of the way.  A tiring prospect in the long term for the creative ones that display initiative in plots and storyline direction.

Ironically,  these players often don't particularly enjoy threads or avoid with similar member types.

However,  many of these players will stick around and one can only hope they'll begin to learn how to really contribute.

Edited February 21, 2017 by Dusty

[xexes 108]

1 hour ago, Dusty said:

 

I have rp'd with quite a few that love the idea of things but aren't able to contribute anything of much substance themselves.  They like to ride on the coattails of other player's ideas and tend to need to be guided each step.of the way.  A tiring prospect in the long term for the creative ones that display initiative in plots and storyline direction.

Ironically,  these players often don't particularly enjoy threads or avoid with similar member types.

However,  many of these players will stick around and one can only hope they'll begin to learn how to really contribute.

 

I've had a lot of success in teaching these kinds of "coattails players' that they can drive the roleplay. I'll write like this:

"...Character performed action with another character... blah blah.

And then...."

 

Literally just that last line works extremely well in changing player's mindsets. Suddenly, roleplay clicks for them. Whether they want to keep driving the roleplay or not is another problem, but just this bottom line alone, just two words (or "And then what happens?" ) helps so much. SO much. It's so simple, too.

 

[AmberE 2]

I much prefer not being the lone administrator. I'm glad to have help. bottom line.

[Sage 289]

I was very lucky with my newest site. It came about when an old one closed, but there were still a few of us that wanted to continue. We were a tightly knit community, so we already knew we worked well as a team and trusted each other implicitly. That is always the way I prefer to staff a site. They're more than just my RP partners or "fellow staff," they're my friends. And it's a completely different experience than staffing a site alone. Then again, I don't join a site just looking to write. I'm in it for the human aspect of collaborative writing and whatever results because of that. And when I choose to staff a site, it's because I want others to get involved on that level as well. I don't expect the members to have the same level of commitment that I do as staff, either, though if they feel the need to volunteer to help, like advertise, create content, etc., then I'm all for it. It's part of building a community.

 

That said, I don't think lone staffers have their experience invalidated. It's just different. And some people are into that. I think if you had that dedicated member base that wanted to help, it would definitely be worth it. Personally, however, I don't think I could handle that sort of stress and would probably end up distancing myself everyone unintentionally because of it. So anyone that can run a successful site on their own has my deepest respect.

 

I think it's very rare to be able to find a site where you can build a community. But if you do, I think it makes the experience 10x more worth it.