Okay, I have a question for y'all. Some of you are familiar with my "do better" form letter... for those who aren't, it's a "here's what we expected from you on your application, please try again." (If you'd like to see it, let me know and I'll send it to you.) Every once in awhile, I get someone who replies back (often quoting the entire thing) and says, "I'm not sure what you're saying here... are you asking me to do something? Have I been accepted?" I believe the form letter is rather clear on this point... it specifically asks for more info. "...please take the time to give us a little more detail about your game..." It goes into detail about *what* I want to see. My question is, am I being unfair if I automatically reject applications when someone responds to the form letter in this way? Is it fair to assume that if a prospective GM can't understand the form letter, or maybe worse, doesn't bother to read it for details, that they aren't going to make a good GM? The form letter is long... 686 words, 66 lines of text. But if someone can't read and understand the form letter despite its length, how can I expect them to run a good game when that takes a lot of time and attention? (I have another prospective GM that shows promise in her ideas... but she takes a week to reply to every message. I'm on the verge of rejecting her based entirely on how slow she is to reply to simple requests for info... I'm afraid that her game would bog down and die from lack of GM responsiveness.) -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
Carl, in regards to the letter that asks for more information, I think that the form letter could be altered to make it somewhat more clear. It states, "Thank you for your application to run a game on the Phoenyx. We're glad that you've chosen us to host your game and look forward to adding you to our family." To me, the phrases "glad you have chosen" and "look forward to adding" make it sound like the applicant has more choice whether they have been accepted than they do, and that they are about to be added to the roster of games. Perhaps you could consider something along the lines of, "Thank you for your application to run a game on the Phoenyx. It has been reviewed and is being considered for acceptance. However, we require additional information in order to process your request." The section further down, "So if you still think you're up to the challenge of running a top-notch game on the Phoenyx, please take the time to give us a little more detail about your game and your PBeM roleplaying experience," is straighforward and easily understood. What I guess might be happening is that your opening paragraph is setting an expectation that they are accepted. And when they get to the part requesting additional information it is confusing. > (I have another prospective GM that shows promise in her ideas... but she > takes a week to reply to every message. I'm on the verge of rejecting her > based entirely on how slow she is to reply to simple requests for > info... I'm afraid that her game would bog down and die from lack of GM > responsiveness.) If she shows promise, perhaps it might be worthwhile to speak to her about the length of turnaround. That way you can find out whether she will be able to develop and sustain a better turnaround time. If she is serious about the game, it may push her to improve. Or it may let her identify that she does not have the ability to repsond quickly enough to make the game viable. That’s my two cents… Lynn Parr Seventh Order -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000 lparr@oncomdis.on.ca wrote: > Carl, in regards to the letter that asks for more information, I think that the > form letter could be altered to make it somewhat more clear. > > It states, "Thank you for your application to run a game on the Phoenyx. We're > glad that you've chosen us to host your game and look forward to adding you to > our family." > > To me, the phrases "glad you have chosen" and "look forward to adding" make it > sound like the applicant has more choice whether they have been accepted than > they do, and that they are about to be added to the roster of games. > > Perhaps you could consider something along the lines of, "Thank you for your > application to run a game on the Phoenyx. It has been reviewed and is being > considered for acceptance. However, we require additional information in order > to process your request." I have to agree with Lynn here, the altered phrasing is much less ambiguous than the original. [snip] > > (I have another prospective GM that shows promise in her ideas... but she > > takes a week to reply to every message. I'm on the verge of rejecting her > > based entirely on how slow she is to reply to simple requests for > > info... I'm afraid that her game would bog down and die from lack of GM > > responsiveness.) > > If she shows promise, perhaps it might be worthwhile to speak to her about the > length of turnaround. That way you can find out whether she will be able to > develop and sustain a better turnaround time. If she is serious about the game, > it may push her to improve. Or it may let her identify that she does not have > the ability to repsond quickly enough to make the game viable. I agree here as well. BTW, on a different topic, should I submit a formal request for my Traveller game? -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, Michael Feldhusen wrote: > I have to agree with Lynn here, the altered phrasing is much less > ambiguous than the original. I'm considering it. > BTW, on a different topic, should I submit a formal request for my > Traveller game? That's the easiest way on my end... that way it gets into the queue with all the information I need. -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, Carl D Cravens wrote: > > BTW, on a different topic, should I submit a formal request for my > > Traveller game? > > That's the easiest way on my end... that way it gets into the queue with > all the information I need. OK, I'll try to get that done this week, next week for sure. (BTW, anyone with any feedback on what I posted to the WWD list should let me know ASAP.) -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
>My question is, am I being unfair if I automatically reject applications >when someone responds to the form letter in this way? Is it fair to >assume that if a prospective GM can't understand the form letter, or maybe >worse, doesn't bother to read it for details, that they aren't going to >make a good GM? The form letter is long... 686 words, 66 lines of >text. But if someone can't read and understand the form letter despite >its length, how can I expect them to run a good game when that takes a lot >of time and attention? > >(I have another prospective GM that shows promise in her ideas... but she >takes a week to reply to every message. I'm on the verge of rejecting her >based entirely on how slow she is to reply to simple requests for >info... I'm afraid that her game would bog down and die from lack of GM >responsiveness.) I say that both the fact that people don't read the whole thing and takes so long to respond shows that they're unwilling to make a commitment, which usually means youths aged 12-16 who want to start it up but don't want to end it. The sure way the tell this is use of common slang, lack of capitals, and WoRdS sPeLlEd LiKe ThIs. But I'm sure you already knew that, being the devoted webmasters you are. =) ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000 lparr@oncomdis.on.ca wrote: > To me, the phrases "glad you have chosen" and "look forward to adding" > make it sound like the applicant has more choice whether they have > been accepted than they do, and that they are about to be added to the > roster of games. I've tried to keep the form letter positive... it's already full of a lot of negativity of sorts and I start out by trying to encourage them. 90% of those who get form letter never respond. In that respect, I suppose it does its job in discouraging unqualified applicants. I'm hearing you Lynn. I'm just trying to decide how right you are. > Perhaps you could consider something along the lines of, "Thank you > for your application to run a game on the Phoenyx. It has been > reviewed and is being considered for acceptance. However, we require > additional information in order to process your request." I'm afraid that's not positive enough. How do I keep a positive feel without them jumping to conclusions and neglecting to read the rest of the letter? A recent response was, "Alright, when do we get started?" Yes, he think's he's been accepted... no, he didn't read the whole thing in detail. > What I guess might be happening is that your opening paragraph is > setting an expectation that they are accepted. And when they get to > the part requesting additional information it is confusing. That's part of my dilemma... if they're confused by the form letter, are they qualified to run a Phoenyx game? Is the form letter *too* confusing, are they just dense, or are they just not paying enough attention to figure out what I'm asking for. (I've found this in other areas... "I don't want to read the entire FAQ for my answer, which I know is in there, so you just tell me what I want to know so I can save the time." Nevermind that the FAQ was written for this kind of person so they'd quit bugging the answer source with trivial questions.) Part of the problem is that the "do better" *is* an intelligence test. If a prospective GM can't read this and figure out what more they ought to be telling me, I question whether they're Phoenyx material. Am I being too tough? On one hand, we're trying to help people; on the other hand, we're trying not to hand-hold prospective GM's through the whole process on the theory that the good ones shouldn't need it. (And because we don't have the time.) Is it worth losing the occasional good GM to keep the bad ones out, or is it worth letting a few bad ones in to keep the occasional good one? Do I err on the side of strictness or leniency? I think maintaining the Phoenyx reputation requires strictness. What I'd really like to hear is current GM's opinions of the process they went through to get their game accepted here. (The more recent the better, since the process has evolved, but I'd like to hear anybody's opinions.) And if you're one of the GM's to whom we responded "you're hired!" without hesitation, do you want to help run a workshop for prospective GM's? > If she shows promise, perhaps it might be worthwhile to speak to her > about the length of turnaround. That way you can find out whether she I pointed it out in my last mail a couple days ago. We've been negotiating the start of this game for two months now. (I liked her ideas, but considering that she's enthusiastic with no experience, I asked her to modify her intended game plan a bit. I thought two opposed groups of 8 players each in a plot that required both of them to stay on a narrow track of opposition was a bit much for a new GM.) I'm waiting to see how/when she responds. -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, Carl D Cravens wrote: > > Perhaps you could consider something along the lines of, "Thank you > > for your application to run a game on the Phoenyx. It has been > > reviewed and is being considered for acceptance. However, we require > > additional information in order to process your request." > > I'm afraid that's not positive enough. How do I keep a positive feel > without them jumping to conclusions and neglecting to read the rest of the > letter? Hmmm... IMHO it was quite fine (except for being overly general in nature: the two latter sentences would fit into the response of just about _any_ application letter.) I think it is more important to deliver a clear message than try to be positive --- as long you're not being outright negative. Personally, I would not consider Lynn's suggested response negative, but then I'm a Finn and the "Thank you" at the beginning makes me think the people who responded must love me (or try to sell me something...) ;-) juuso -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Listowner tools are found at http://www.phoenyx.net/listowners
