nu.kanga.list.mud-dev

15523: Re: [MUD-Dev] Criminalize Community Volunteers?

> From: "Madrona Tree" <madronatree@hotmail.com>
> Reply-To: mud-dev@kanga.nu
> Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 22:20:21 -0700
> To: <mud-dev@kanga.nu>
> Subject: Re: [MUD-Dev] Criminalize Community Volunteers?
> 
> In my perfect Admin Program world, Admins would work from home, just as they
> do now, and get a check every week for $100 for their effort, instead of a
> $10/month free account.
> 
> I think you're probably right about the turn-over rate -- but not because of
> the reason that you state.  I think that if Origin had to pay counselors for
> what they were doing, they'd get a higher quality program, because Origin
> (and their customers) would want their money's worth.

I'm 100% (or more) on Madrona's side on this one.

A bit of context: AOL's policy of volunteer usage derives directly from the
policies of Compuserve and GEnie.  Ten years ago, during the heyday of these
services, access to the system cost $6-$12 per hour.  "Volunteers" were
effectively being compensated well over minimum wage; it was, in many cases,
the only way that people of moderate means could continue to maintain access
to the service.

There's only two differences between the way GEnie did it and the way AOL
did it:  AOL is flat-rate, and AOL relied on uncompensated volunteers for
many of the positions that received royalties on GEnie.  (GEnie*Basic did
provide free message boards, but the big time-wasters like chat and games
were still $6/hr.)  Of course, AOL has gotten rid of most of their
volunteers by now.

Likewise, the tradition of "volunteer customer service" derives directly
from Simutronics.  Simu GMs were provided free access to GEnie -- $6/hr.
Not coincidentally, several Simu GMs were very active elsewhere on the
service.

In other words, the volunteer system was built on compensating volunteers
with real and substantial benefits.  Volunteers were effectively paid with
"virtual money."

According to some of the arguments I've seen surrounding this issue,
customer service should have steadily improved over the past ten years
because "volunteers" are no longer being "overcompensated" for their
services.

Now, I think there are positions that can safely be filled with volunteers
-- take Asheron's Call's Advocates, whose sole job is to answer new player
questions from the perspective of an experienced player.  But the minute you
start putting volunteers into positions where they're expected to be able to
solve real problems, IMO you're relying on unpaid novices to do a paid
expert's job.

To hijack Dave Rickey's metaphor, it's like making your candy-stripers
[hospital volunteers] perform triage duty and clean out bedpans.

Admittedly, I can't think of customer service as either fun or a privilege.
Maybe it's because I don't have the temperament.  Maybe it's because I've
heard one too many stories of GMs having to smile and be polite while
players hurl around invective that gets censored out of unabridged
dictionaries.  Perhaps it's different for somebody who's better suited to
the job.

(And no, I don't do customer service.  I remind The Big Cheese of this on a
regular basis.)

Of course, such idealistic beliefs run up against the fact that small
commercial MUDs just don't rake in enough money to compensate their staff at
the rate they're worth.  And that if we weren't able to use volunteers, we
might not be able to provide the experiece we want to offer.

Or, as I said to my husband who first forwarded this article to me, "Thank
you ever so much for such a cheerful start to my day."  (Yep, that's
sarcasm...)

--
Sharon Mock (Ananda Dawnsinger)
Worldbuilding Lead and Loremistress General,
(project to be named later)





_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev@kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev