You ask about it in above topic.
I mention about this issue here because all topics are ignored by admins
||My guess is that nobody including myself knew about that documentation until one member pointed it out (can't remember which one).
I'll look into it and get a response this week.
As for my earlier week's response to the community, I have dropped a mail to Mess yesterday and will share the response once I get one.
Also - this thread is for expectations from CAB members, I am not sure why this is being posted here.
Is it hard to write a short confirmation that standards under link http://apps.topcoder.com/wiki/display/tc/Component+Development+Member+Guidelines#ComponentDevelopmentMemberGuidelines-CodingStandards are obsolate or invalid for Code track?
As title says 'Component Development Member Guidelines', it was required for Component Development track, not for Code.
This is really flustrating that some reviewers require it and we must argue every contest...
||>> I think I can at least say that topcoder is indeed working behind the scenes on getting that resolved asap
They said same thing 1 year ago...
||It's my bad.
I have not followed proactively with topcoder about the things that we can share with the community and things that we can't.
Re: Review process and coding standards, I think I can at least say that topcoder is indeed working behind the scenes on getting that resolved asap - we have seen first hand the type of changes that topcoder is working on.
I'll try getting a better detail this week.
||What's the difference between a CAB member and normal member?
New CAB were chosen 2 months ago and I don't see any changes in the review process and coding standards.
There are topics like this
created by a CAB member and they are completely ignored by TC admins.
This also is completely ignored. I asked a similar question in the past.
I run the CAB program and I hear your frustration. I hope I can help bring some clarity here, as I think it's really important to set expectations for 2016 (as callmekatootie's original post is focusing on).
2015 was the first year Topcoder staff worked with a community advisory board, and we learned quite a lot. I am grateful to the 2015 CAB group for helping us shape this program and being the first members to work with us in this capacity. It took us a few meetings to get the format worked out, staff aligned, etc. Also, there was a lot of change happening within the staff groups which slowed us a bit.
CAB is the liaison between the Topcoder team and the community -- and they are very passionate about what the community needs. They are tasked with discovering those needs and presenting them to us. Our job is to listen to those needs. We also share new ideas and upcoming features/process changes with CAB and get their reactions.
As you can imagine, last year's CAB members were very vocal about several topics, including DR and TCO changes. In fact, CAB gave us some very valuable feedback with regards to TCO and we reworked some things so we could keep Period 4 after discussing it with them.
They also brought us feedback and great details about several topics, including the dissatisfaction around the review process and the website. They also brought us the following issues -- all of which were implemented, improved or fixed:
- Bring back 24-hour reminders for SRMs
- Bring back "fun" MM
- Bring back Member of the Month
- Faster updates to SRM calendar
- Clarity into the support process, with more responsiveness in the forums
- More responsiveness and faster resolution of payment issues
- More communication upfront about changes
- Better onboarding for new members
The reality here is that it takes time to align member needs/expectations with the goals of our business and the needs of our customers (who supply our members with projects to work on). The feedback and valuable information the 2015 CAB team brought us is still heard today and documented for our teams.
Albert, I know you have not been as active lately, so you may not have seen the large number of posts from several Topcoder team members who are committed to more communication with the members. That is our goal and we're working very hard to continue this. But the 2015 CAB team has done an excellent job and I believe the 2016 CAB is a great group of members who will continue to bring us vital feedback and ideas.
||As a veteran, I occasionally visit the forums, though I stopped active TopCoder participation several months ago. I generally keep silent and just see what's going on, however I feel I have to say something after reading your response here.
You have been saying you take all CAB input very seriously, repeatedly, by many different [topcoder] admins, but the truth is, we as members have never seen... From the website revamp, TCO track rearrangement, dev track finals cancellation, to DR program cancellation. Do you seriously think there is effective communication between admin and members? It's not even communication IMHO! At first, I proactively tried to communicate, hoping admins would listen and act - at least give reasonable answers/updates - however what I saw was always "we're in progress doing ABC", "we're considering DEF", "you're more than welcome to suggest XYZ". Then I'm totally frustrated and disappointed, then I left.
||- Most probably their should be some criteria like the "review board qualification criteria" to work on projects like "TC Arena development".
IMO it's very important.
- May be introduction something like "payment multipliers" or "points multipliers" can be more beneficial. The multiplier keeps increasing if a "Coder" wins (Can be 1st or 2nd or top5 ...) in a series of contest. Loosing the contest or not participating in will reset the multiplier.
||I agree that there is no Marathon member in the new team, but the website problems and inconvenients seem to affect more tracks and have been widely discussed.
Even though I never participated in Marathon competitions, I always remained as a spectator. Also in many SRMs I am always around to see the questions, the members that competed, the winners etc. It seems to be getting some hope the last few SRMs, but generally the number of participants is way small to what has been a few years back. I think the effect of participation in SRMs navigated to Marathon as well (assuming). As a member I feel bad about all that, because from what I can read from past forums the algorithm side has been such a unique community with so much passion.
If I do a personal estimation the following factors have affected the algorithm competitions. Well, I am just guessing, please don't get me wrong.
1. Bad Website experience (50%)
2. Constant Arena failures (20%)
3. Decline of forum use (for supporting new members and for discussing algorithm problems) (5%)
4. Lack of attention to algorithm competitors (Topcoder seems to be much about development and design) (10%)
5. Some problems with problems (there were times fun Marathons were scarce and SRMs were not 4 per month - and some people also say problems at SRMs are becoming rather difficult) (10%)
6. Discontinued SRM notifications (4% :))
7. (Always leave space for uncertainties)
Mimino has said it all some time in the past.
5 and 6 seem to be getting fine. I haven't heard about the problem 2 in a while. 1 is still a mountain but my gut tells me they are working hard. But they have to go a bit farther to win back the user base that is lost. In that process, website has to be organized. Algorithm content in the website and in forums may have to be very organized to make it attractive for new users. We at CAB, will try to constantly voice these.
||There is no rule saying admins cannot vote.
||I asked about different thing. I will try to formulate in other words. Have admins a rule to not vote?
||Admins do have the ability to vote, yes.
||I prefer to see an answer like the following
Cancelling of the DR program was actively discussed here, I do not think that we able to change something, Topcoder's decision is final.
(a) [answer of a careful person]
When suggestions for other bonus programs will appear we will definitely discuss them with the staff and community.
(b) [answer of a careful person that does think about improvements]
Suggestions about other bonus programs still not sounded. We will ask the staff about their requirements to the programs and inform community to give food for thinking.
rather than rejection of discussion (you have mentioned this process as "will discuss why we won't be continuing") even of a things that are not sounded at present time.
To me the strong voice was thorough representation of needs of the community in discussions. After reading of your comment I think it is my mistake, your strong voice is something different.
I have one question that is irrelevant to the topic. Do admins vote (press +/-) on forum posts or no?
||I believe callmekatootie is fair in saying that he will be informing us of what the community is wanting and the level of importance it is.
@alegro: you may be misinterpreting "strong voice" to mean aggressive, which I hope you don't. In the monthly meetings that CAB and the Topcoder Team have, we go around the table and have the CABbies bring up what they have been hearing around the community. The Topcoder Team then explains if there is already action being placed on that issue in detail and if not, will discuss why we won't be continuing. Either way, it is then communicated back to the community by the CAB members.
Let it be known that we take all CAB input very seriously and we know they represent the entire community, which is why their voice is "strong".