We want the best people to see this, not just the members. Let them see! It does us no harm.
Edit: By making it easier for them to get work with devs, they’re able to prove themselves much more easily and will help us remove the glass ceiling to join the dev community.
portfolios should be visible, collaboration threads should not be. especially with dev groups putting out applications, it could cause a lot of fluff to come in
I’m willing to give it a shot. Perhaps they could be limited to link-only cases, so that way they can’t freely browse (and become potential bothers if people are looking for another forum member to help), and so in cases like OP’s, they can see the details they need.
I think it would make details on games, which people are looking for help with, will become even more vague than they are already, as will give away even ore surprises to a wider audience… quite concerning imo.
I think that there should be a public version of collaboration, and a private version. Some projects I believe only members should hear/know about to apply.
I’d love to see an influx of more people seeing my collaboration threads, so yeah it would be a fun thing to have! Maybe a public and a private section
I don’t think there is any glass ceiling at all, if you have good games, and you know what you’re doing, even to a small degree you will get accepted into the devforums if you apply and if you don’t due to attitude etc, then do we really want people like that applying for our game positions anyway?
More importantly, when I put something up in #collaboration I am reassured by the fact that if the person who applies ends up scamming me or doing something wrong, I can contact devrel and have them removed from the forums. Also, it’s a sign that they are a community member of good standing, and that they, to a certain degree, know what they’re doing.
If collaboration is Members only I know that the person has passed some form of moderation. It’s the only reason I come to the DevForum when finding people to hire.
It used to be that only great people were allowed in. At least let us keep the minimum qualifications
I don’t see any harm in letting everyone view collaboration, it’s not like it’s impacting who you choose out of all the candidates who apply to work with you.
Not all developers are a part of the developer forum, and I feel it would be fair in that sense to give them the same opportunity for work. The membership of the forum isn’t an automatic sign you’re a “better developer” than someone who isn’t.
However as others have mentioned, there’s the problem with not knowing the moderation history of the individual, and not knowing if they participate in scams. Again though, this should be at the discretion of the developer choosing who to collaborate with (it’s fairly easy to tell who’s legit and who’s not by looking at their previous work).
Portfolios should definitely be made open for public viewing, and I have mixed feelings about collaboration offers but I am leaning towards the idea of making it open to view. I feel the benefits definitely outweigh the risks.
I think the collaboration section should be kept private and invisible to non-devforum members.
A lot of developers using this platform are here looking for potential business opportunities as they have managed to make Roblox somewhat of a job. Considering this, it is likely that these developers want to keep thing strictly professional and for good job offers to be posted on the thread in question. While non-devforum members can be professional and also great developers, there are also a lot of people that aren’t so professional and are also new to developing and so aren’t in a position to collaborate with other developers regardless.
I’m all for opening up access to different resources as it helps to grow the aspiring developer community that Roblox has grown over the years, however I also feel that Roblox should cater a little to those that have made it as a developer and want to continue working with other creators amongst the devforum community.
Not only this, but a lot of developers wish to keep their development job opportunities and requests private as they do not wish to be spammed by people that aren’t necessarily professional about a job that they may be looking for or someone they may be looking to hire.
There’s definitely times I’d probably want to keep it private. For instance, if I’m giving a large payout to someone for work, I don’t want to get spammed on my Twitter DM by people just trying to make money.
It’s pretty easy to just share a collaboration effort publicly on other mediums. Or even just a screenshot of the post on here.
But I don’t feel heavily opinionated either way really.
I am definitely against making the category public.
I understand you want to expand the community, but whenever I post openings to the DevForum it is because:
everyone who can see the post has passed basic moderation and has had their skills recognized by the Developer Relations Team;
if something goes wrong (scamming, etc.), most (including myself) are confident the appropriate repercussions can be easily arranged, so the probability of any of that happening is much lower;
it is assumed that DevForum members will never go around “leaking” content restricted to them, so the basic ideas and descriptions behind games can be explained without a great risk of being copied.
As I see it, making collaborations public would lead to users:
being much less descriptive in their job posts, in most cases just posting things like Builder needed for $200, negotiable. Contact me for more details.;
just overall opting to use alternative channels when looking for developers, like limiting their search to the #collaboration channel on the DevForum Discord server;
That said, I don’t think the same would really apply to the #collaboration:portfolios sub, but I guess it’s not that useful on its own.
EDIT: I forgot to mention that making the category public would force users to adapt a new writing style (e.g., no cursing, no offsite-links, no references to external services like Discord and Trello, etc.)
