💡 ban project manager / commission finding in the marketplace (not as in ban the posters, just do...

[lilac eagle]

Please discuss this idea civilly, don't forget to vote on this idea in #📝︱server-suggestions!

[steel dock]

was actually gonna bring this up not that long ago because it tends to spark really drawn out arguments and debates due to marketplace rules not coorelating properly

if this gets 5 votes ill forward it bcuz i was going to anyways

[remote imp]

now add it

[steel dock]

kk

forwarded

removed project manager thingy tho

cuz i dont agree w it

[remote imp]

isn't that the same thing as finders or smth

[jaunty vector]

that's not a development skill, and i want you to forward my entire suggestion to preserve the integrity of it. then you can add an additional comment with it saying you disagree with one point of my suggestion. but i still want your staff to see my entire suggestion

[woven dagger]

Project managers should be allowed in the theoretical skilled marketplace. Yellow names should not be allowed to post those

[woven dagger]

It can be a skill but most children in this server don't realise that you are supposed to ask your project manager for their portfolio so you know that they are legitimate

[jaunty vector]

project managers are not a development skill

it should not be allowed, period

[woven dagger]

Have you ever worked in a successful project to say this tho?

[jaunty vector]

thats management, not development

i do not need to work in a team environment to say that

[woven dagger]

Given that you downvoted and strongly disagreed with the skilled-for-hire channel, I think we disagree because you assume that there is no benefit to a skilled project manager. Their role is to manage all of the developers involved. I think that it would be fair to ban it if we assumed that the team involved was just a bunch of rank 1 devs because they wont be completing any projects anyways. But for serious teams its fair to allow it

[jaunty vector]

i did NOT disagree to the skilled for hire channel AT ALL, i only disagreed to unlocking the regular for hire channel to level 5+ instead of skill level 1&up

[jaunty vector]

as for the rest of your message, project managing is not, and never will be, a development skill. project management is exactly that - management. hence, it does not belong in the marketplace

[woven dagger]

skilled-for-hire was for rank 2 and up. You said that you thought that rank 1 was enough proof- smth along those lines- which is where we fundamentally disagree.

[jaunty vector]

regardless, i did not object against the channel altogether. i just dont think we should unlock the normal for hire to everyone with chat level 5+

it was restricted to skill level (any skill) 1+ for a reason, now the integrity of the marketplace is gone

[woven dagger]

Again, this is where we disagree. You thought that skill 1+ was good enough, which I disagree with.

There should be no difference between rank 1's and yellow-names. Rank 1 can be achieved in a day for all categories.

Where-as rank 2 would require at least some serious study of the field they're trying to get a rank in. Rank 1's are not ready to take commissions, and yeah, in that case, not only are project managers useless, but it isn't a skill that RSC should consider.

But for rank 2 and above, project managers with a serious portfolio should be allowed to find work here.

[jaunty vector]

that disagreement on it's own is quite irrelevant. which skill level should have access is irrelevant, that's a second topic. we BOTH agreed that a skilled for hire channel is nice to have (maybe even SHOULD be added)
so again, this argument does not hinge on which skill level should have access at all, that's not what this argument is about.

just to give you a brief overview, this is my current stance on the matter:

1. i do not have an opinion on which skill level and up should have access to pro for hire
2. NORMAL for hire should require at least skill level 1 in any skill, like it used to be before pro for hire was added

[woven dagger]

Again, we disagree for your point two.
There is literally no difference between yellow roles and rank 1. That is what I think.
By even suggesting that rank 1 is a viable boundary, you're giving that skill level validity that it doesn't deserve.
Likewise, here you are implying that say- rank 1s in anything could have more validity than a project manager that is managing a team of rank 2's and above, which is insane.

You can say that it is irrelevant, but if we're talking about integrity here- what we have in mind are two very different things.

[jaunty vector]

ah ok, so i just misunderstood you. in that case, the argument we're having is indeed what the argument is actually supposed to be about
we have pro for hire at level 2, but i also dont trust people without skill roles to post themselves as for hire. level 1 is therefore a logical middleground considering the current circumstances
that being said, we could perhaps raise pro to level 3 and normal to level 2, that way the entire marketplace is secure and pro for hire really does consist of pros as pro for hire now also allows intermediate ranks to post there

[south edge]

I’m honestly in favor of letting people without skill roles post in there

[south edge]

for hire, not the pro version

[jaunty vector]

❌

[woven dagger]

You know what? I agree with raising pro to level three and normal to level 2

[jaunty vector]

you mean level 3 ("free")?

[woven dagger]

i may be stupid

[jaunty vector]

is my alternative unreasonable? sorry, i don't get sarcasm or social cues

[woven dagger]

hell na 99.99% of hiring posts from rank 1 and below are complete slop

[woven dagger]

ur right i made a really dumb typo

its been a long day

[jaunty vector]

glad we could agree on something then lol :D

[woven dagger]