>In my mind, low success rate != process not being good. Not
>necessarily. Now, I don't know either way in this case, but I
>do know there can be other factors leading to the perceived
>success or failure of a project than process. Perhaps it
>really is more difficult than people think prior to imming?
>Maybe it is tough to screen folks you found off the internet
>who play a digital version of D&D? Maybe it isn't as fun as
>people thought and they'd rather just play instead? Or, like
>you imply, maybe they're process really does suck. I was just
>wondering how you came to that conclusion.

Okay, look at it like this. If you have a statistic that you are unhappy with, and you want to change that statistic you take all of the things your talking about into consideration and figure out how to affect change. Right? So you say to yourself, "What can we do in the process of training staff that will reduce burnout, that will help them to see the fun side of imming, that will teach them the fundamental skills, that will screen out the bad apples - but raise the success rate of our avatars?" And then you go from there.


>I suppose what I'm trying to say all boils down to, why would
>you assume that CF should be run similar to any sort of
>profit-based organization? Don't they all donate they're time
>for this thing?

I think you guys are confusing the issue by assuming that being for profit or not for profit has anything to do with it. What you have is an orginization with an objective, and so you have to do the things that effectively take an orginization to it's objective.

As an aside, it would be nice to see a CF mission statement even if it were just, "To provide a free internet game for people to enjoy."