Oh is someone else going to take over? I can do it; I've been wanting to start a federation for a while now

I think that federations are a thing of the past now. This revival didn’t really get anywhere. In fact, there hasn’t been any federations that did well since the USS and SPA. The requests forum is much quieter than it used to be so that’s why it’s so difficult to get federations off the ground.

FloatingMuffins wrote:

I think that federations are a thing of the past now. This revival didn’t really get anywhere. In fact, there hasn’t been any federations that did well since the USS and SPA. The requests forum is much quieter than it used to be so that’s why it’s so difficult to get federations off the ground.

Yeah, 2019 and earlier was the time for federations. I tried starting the Diamond Union but most shops aren't really interested in that type of stuff. ShopBux did really well but only because it was 2019 and an original idea. That Pigeon Messaging Service did ok for the first few days but then it fell out of activity. I think we just have to agree to stop federations entirely, they're just not useful anymore.

I agree with what a few users have been saying in the past several posts, pertaining to the feasibility of bringing this shop federation together.

Although I'm not technically part of this federation as of writing this post, I feel like FloatingMuffins worded it best:

FloatingMuffins wrote:

I think that federations are a thing of the past now. This revival didn’t really get anywhere. In fact, there hasn’t been any federations that did well since the USS and SPA. The requests forum is much quieter than it used to be so that’s why it’s so difficult to get federations off the ground.

As of right now, I could see the shop federation act as more of a “for fun” group of shops if leadership decides to keep the organization running. I'm not sure if other services will be used much. It would be interesting to see what current leadership decides to do with the USS, but if they decide to shut it down, I remain appreciative of all the support and effort people have put into this organization over the past few years. Besides, it's a bit crazy that the first iteration of this shop federation was created over four years ago now!

Although this may come across as prideful or perhaps over-confident, it's also nice to look back and think of the USS as a prominent example of how shop federations worked.

Lastly, I'd like to provide a link to the “original topic” that was used between October 2016 and November 2018. A few weeks ago, I went back and edited the original post a bit to make it a bit more clear and presentable, although I might resume doing that with the rest of the posts linked in that OP. Feel free to check out that topic for nostalgic reasons or to see how the USS worked back then.

Thank you,
Austinato
Former USS Leader (2016-2018)

Edit: Fixed some grammar.

Yeah, honestly I barely use scratch anymore and don’t really have much interest anymore so you can really do whatever you want.

GrahamSH wrote:

Yeah, honestly I barely use scratch anymore and don’t really have much interest anymore so you can really do whatever you want.

Is this the official end of the USS and this era of federations?

MClovers wrote:

GrahamSH wrote:

Yeah, honestly I barely use scratch anymore and don’t really have much interest anymore so you can really do whatever you want.

Is this the official end of the USS and this era of federations?

It appears so.

The Scratch Shop Reviews And Assistance Federation (SSRAF) is still here and looking for staff. I want to keep a federation going just for the fun of it. I’m hoping to keep shops alive, but it may very well be the end for federations. https://scratch-mit-edu.ezproxy.canberra.edu.au/discuss/topic/436711

Tbh, the reason that federations r dead is because there's so many different shops. Sure, only a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of those shops r actually active, but that's why. Even if you have the most active and well-known shops in your federation, there's so many it won't seem like the federation is large. Along with the fragmentation of shops, that naturally comes with a fragmentation of federations and currencies. (its lowkey a dream of mine to have a bunch of shops conglomerate into one mega-shop, even tho thats unlikely since the biggest a shop can realistically get is ~50 members)

At this point you're better off with a bunch of partnerships. It doesn't help that we're in a period where the veterans r starting to quit Scratch. Sure, we'll get new veterans, but rn we're in kinda a middle period. :\

LydzWinry wrote:

At this point you're better off with a bunch of partnerships. It doesn't help that we're in a period where the veterans r starting to quit Scratch. Sure, we'll get new veterans, but rn we're in kinda a middle period. :\

Ah

I've been on scratch for 5 years but only became active last January

I agree that keeping the USS running right now will be a challenging task, but I'm willing to work with others to keep it running (probably to a smaller scale) if anyone is interested. I know RedGuy7 is interested. Anyone else?

Austinato wrote:

I agree that keeping the USS running right now will be a challenging task, but I'm willing to work with others to keep it running (probably to a smaller scale) if anyone is interested. I know RedGuy7 is interested. Anyone else?

It'll be a good marketing thing to have the original creator of the USS and I'd be willing to be a Head Moderator.

Austinato wrote:

I agree that keeping the USS running right now will be a challenging task, but I'm willing to work with others to keep it running (probably to a smaller scale) if anyone is interested. I know RedGuy7 is interested. Anyone else?

I guess if I’m Co-Owner now I can take the spot of Owner.

Alright, we've got a total of four people on board so far!

Before we start moving to a new thread, let's discuss some ideas and concerns any of us may have. I have some suggestions to get us started:

• Let's simplify the rules. I suggest we “cancel” the constitution and any terms and conditions we have for the USS on a federation level. This isn't to say we're going to proceed with no rules, though; let's make sure our federation has simple rules that everyone understands. If we need to reverse this decision and re-implement complex rules, we can always explore those options later.
  
• Let's aim to keep the roles simple. The amount of roles we have right now seems to be an appropriate amount; let's avoid adding any unnecessary roles in order to keep the USS rolling nice and smoothly.
  
• Let's simplify the representative system. I suggest that we sort of change the definition of “representative” moving forward. I suggest that we stray away from having a set amount of representatives, and instead allow any member of our shops to engage in our discussions freely. The tradeoff here is that in the end, their shop altogether counts as one vote. Removing the “representative” position can help us avoid problems with activity.
  
• Let's keep votes simple and to a minimum. Although I am a proponent for having a democratic process here at the USS (therefore allowing our shops and shop representatives to have a say in our federation), I suggest that we try to keep our amount of votes to a minimum, if possible. Either that or try to group them after an activity check, to avoid encountering activity issues and stuff of that sort.
  
• Let's have consistent activity checks. I'm aiming towards monthly; at the start of each month, we quickly run through our list of shops and kick out inactive ones. Obviously, we'll use common sense here. For example, if a shop already stated they're going to be inactive (possibly for a set amount of time), we won't kick them out.
  

Those are some suggestions I have for this new “era” of USS leadership. Of course, we can revise these suggestions, not implement them, or implement them! Feel free to discuss these. I have some more ideas but I'll keep this at a reasonable pace.

Can I help with the new USS as a secretary (manages activity checks, deals with issues, monitors reports)?

Just a little semantics issue I have, ‘co-owner’ means that you are owning it together with someone. A better term if the co-owner is 2nd in the hierarchy would be something like ‘president’ or ‘deputy owner’ or something similar.

Programs: I'd say we have to have a few programs aside from the perks. The perks are really good ideas and I say we keep those but there are a few programs that I came up with in my Diamond Union that would be nice to have in the new USS. We also need to encourage shops to redeem perks and use packages. Diamond Order let shops transfer orders to each other. Placeholder Order let shops practise orders. We had a review program where the federation reviewed their orders that they completed but with shops offering their own review forms I don't think that's necessary. An advertising program could have new shops in the federation be advertised for a week.

I'm glad you didn't make this United Shops of Scratch Requests
No one likes the U.S.S.R. after all
Good decision

Tmanplayz wrote:

I'm glad you didn't make this United Shops of Scratch Requests
No one likes the U.S.S.R. after all
Good decision

this is blasphemy

Alright then.
I’ll start with the main post, then Austinato can reserve a post for the rules page, I’ll reserve two posts for members and staff, MClovers can reverse a post or two if they want, so can Redguy7 and p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-. Sounds good?

78ch3 wrote:

Alright then.
I’ll start with the main post, then Austinato can reserve a post for the rules page, I’ll reserve two posts for members and staff, MClovers can reverse a post or two if they want, so can Redguy7 and p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-. Sounds good?

I would disagree. I think only the owner should be on the front page so they can handle everything at once.