Suggestion Hiring Packagers rather than buying Packages

Discussion in 'Community Matters' started by Kaynil, Feb 25, 2019.

  1. Kaynil

    Kaynil Paragon Package Team Valued Contributor

    1,455
    366
    200
    +485
    5
    -0
    Ever since the last time I was a packager this idea has circling in my head, with the latest posts in the community matters regarding the packages, it seems like I might be a good time to bring this idea forward to FP.

    I think a switch on focus could help both the team members working as packagers and the forum owners. Packagers could get to be more in control of the communities they post on and forum owners would get a member that is more likely to be interested in what your web is about.

    So my idea would be to place the focus in the team members. The idea would be that the packages would be more like hiring a member and the different packages being used to dictate the amount of time or amount of posts. I haven't been able to think in all the details, which is what has stopped me before to share it but I am sure together we can really come up with a way to make both packagers and forum owners to get satisfaction.



    Anyway, just get things rolling, as an example, this is what I have been able to come up with.

    We could have each current PTM have a thread, explaining what are their preferences and availability. In essence what they love, what they are okay with and what things they rather not to deal with. Also how many communities they are willing or able to commit with at a time. (Within the maximum allowed by the PTL)

    And they would have their current queue, where members can see if they are available for an offer or not, or get an idea around when they could be available. This could give control to the PTMs to better choose where to volunteer, or at the very least with the preference description, the forum owners a better idea who would be a good candidate to hire for a week or two in their community.

    To have some sort of control, you could still have cool down periods and fixed packages to ensure uniformity. All packages would be a 1PTM, the could be a fixed amount of posts spread during X amount of time. Pretty much in tune with the timing PTL already deems appropriate for current packages so, for example, Ruby could be something like 5 threads and 10 replies spread over the week. Emerald 3 threads and 6 replies in the week.

    I guess if there were people that don't mind waiting or what PTM chooses their community, and to minimise the case of PTMs with nothing to do, the forum owner could also post a thread like usual, but rather than being a FIFO the understanding would be on it sitting for the consideration of the PTMs with an open spot during X amount of time (say 3 weeks before is considered urgent) and have the PTM instead queue it if they want to call dibs. If the thread has been for enough time to be considered urgent, then it would be to the discretion of the PTL to find a PTM or adding it to their own queue.​


    Perhaps there is an easier way than what I thought of, to make the packaging system of FP one where forum owners feel we are getting a genuine member to spend time with our communities and packagers feel a bit more in control with where they can spend their time posting. I definitely would love to hear the community ideas and feelings regarding this.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. Cameron Taylor

    Cameron Taylor Owner Administrator Owner

    16,185
    575
    360
    +892
    28
    -0
    This is an interesting idea that you have suggested. I'd worry that forums/blogs of certain niches would be unable to get their requests completed, because there wouldn't be anyone any PTMs wanting to complete packages for those sites. In general, I eventually feel like we need to reach the point where our package service is similar to what our review service turned into. Requests would be filled by members of our community, and there would only be 1-2 staff members who would be responsible for monitoring the quality of the posts that are made. Obviously, the structure and value of FP$ would have to drastically change, before something like this would ever be possible.