While this seems interesting, I fail to see 2 differences. One is how would this protected area be different than school? It's basically a school on build, which some are even thinking about doing full scale. While build tends to be more mature than school, I don't think this alone is a valid reason to have "school on build."
The only real fix for this is to just focus on merging school with build if enough people agree, then actually continuing to do conventional trials, but discouraging (denying sounds harsh to a student) a trial if the (honestly, I think staff, but some might think...) members think they may not be mature or ready.***
The other thing I fail to see is, how does this speed up the trial process? Someone can go from joining ORE to member in as little as (likely) 30 minutes if they finish early and explain well, although the typical is probably 1 hour-1.25 hours. With this method, you mentioned that members must vote on if they should be in the server, and this just seems to take longer.
Quiet people might also be a small issue. You said that the community must vote on this instead of staff, which DOES make sense because the community of ORE is all of the members. But most members feel as though they are not an essential part of the governmental system, some don't even want to be. Adding this new this new standard to the member society might do absolutely nothing. Testificates who tend to be quiet may have to wait for days and be annoyed as to why nobody is doing anything. And that sucks, because quiet people seem to be the most mature and even skilled. So I do feel that the staff/moderator should do the trialing and accepting.
However, I do also see a few good things with this. I agree that maturity should also be a factor in the trial, AS WELL as redstone skill. It's important to show you can be part of the server by being respectful, not annoying, etc. and should be included with a trial. With the conventional 1 hour build trial, it is hard to judge that, but this new trial system gives these [Testificates] or whatever you call them the server experience, and all of us the ability to have them part of the server to see what they are like.
This also seems to be less intimidating*** to a student. Instead of a 1 hour trial where you build something and explain it, you get a plot and you build for a while and the community accepts you in.
***The process of accepting a trial based on maturity may still sound harsh. However, will this new process of having a separate world for Testificates be any less harsh? It won't, because it is still "harsh" to deny students membership based on maturity. Now, it will not be as intimidating, as intimidating implies being scared. Students might fear the trial more than this membership test run.
But matters of harsh/intimidation could also be of its own trial, to test their determination and will. If they give up or rage about being denied a trial (or in cut's case, membership to the server), do we really want them here? Of course not, so this seemingly negative factor could actually bring about a positive.***
I still suggest that we merge school with build (another discussion, not here) and accept trial applications when they are deemed mature AND when they have met the application requirements. I also feel that staff (and moderators) should take the main part in this, accepting and trialing students, while we leave members alone to do their own things. Members can take a role in this if they so wish by teaching students/testificates.
The only real fix for this is to just focus on merging school with build if enough people agree, then actually continuing to do conventional trials, but discouraging (denying sounds harsh to a student) a trial if the (honestly, I think staff, but some might think...) members think they may not be mature or ready.***
The other thing I fail to see is, how does this speed up the trial process? Someone can go from joining ORE to member in as little as (likely) 30 minutes if they finish early and explain well, although the typical is probably 1 hour-1.25 hours. With this method, you mentioned that members must vote on if they should be in the server, and this just seems to take longer.
Quiet people might also be a small issue. You said that the community must vote on this instead of staff, which DOES make sense because the community of ORE is all of the members. But most members feel as though they are not an essential part of the governmental system, some don't even want to be. Adding this new this new standard to the member society might do absolutely nothing. Testificates who tend to be quiet may have to wait for days and be annoyed as to why nobody is doing anything. And that sucks, because quiet people seem to be the most mature and even skilled. So I do feel that the staff/moderator should do the trialing and accepting.
However, I do also see a few good things with this. I agree that maturity should also be a factor in the trial, AS WELL as redstone skill. It's important to show you can be part of the server by being respectful, not annoying, etc. and should be included with a trial. With the conventional 1 hour build trial, it is hard to judge that, but this new trial system gives these [Testificates] or whatever you call them the server experience, and all of us the ability to have them part of the server to see what they are like.
This also seems to be less intimidating*** to a student. Instead of a 1 hour trial where you build something and explain it, you get a plot and you build for a while and the community accepts you in.
***The process of accepting a trial based on maturity may still sound harsh. However, will this new process of having a separate world for Testificates be any less harsh? It won't, because it is still "harsh" to deny students membership based on maturity. Now, it will not be as intimidating, as intimidating implies being scared. Students might fear the trial more than this membership test run.
But matters of harsh/intimidation could also be of its own trial, to test their determination and will. If they give up or rage about being denied a trial (or in cut's case, membership to the server), do we really want them here? Of course not, so this seemingly negative factor could actually bring about a positive.***
I still suggest that we merge school with build (another discussion, not here) and accept trial applications when they are deemed mature AND when they have met the application requirements. I also feel that staff (and moderators) should take the main part in this, accepting and trialing students, while we leave members alone to do their own things. Members can take a role in this if they so wish by teaching students/testificates.