To clarify, you want your action plan to consist of at least nine separate sections, each of which will have a subplan's level of detail?
Right now, there's only one section that's valid, since you ignore subplans which aren't voted on. The final number might be more than nine, if subplans get added, or less than nine, if not every one gets voted on. My intuition is on the less side.
I want to work with you. From my writing experience—which is certainly less than yours—I'd expect several smaller plans, each corresponding to a separate scene, to be easier to write for; if I'm wrong, I'll stop. If you'd like to be able to choose which points you write, I'm more than happy to accommodate.
Thing is, modularizing the planning has a lot of benefits. It makes it easier for more people to engage with planning. The finer levels of granularity helps the final plan reflect the will of the thread better. It means that it's okay if a plan maintainer has IRL commitments that don't mesh with when voting closes. In fact, that's exactly what happened the last time we modularized a plan, which was for chapter 91, which I feel was the best update (out of all good ones) yet.
My understanding of your complaint about the accompanying plan was that it was
long ("I have a draft for the next plan that is equal or greater to this one in length."), which is what I've tried to address. The top-level plan is both short and simple. Each of the current subplans is short and simple and should remain so, since they're reasonably focused. Since this is very much a time when the various points don't interact with each other, I anticipate that, at any moment that you're writing, you're engaging with a small, simple plan, each corresponding to a scene, which I anticipate to be easier for you to write. If I'm wrong about this,
please communicate this so I can stop failing to make things easier.
It's more work for the GMs (who have to find all the various subplans and write a story on them) and the voters (who have to find all the various subplans and vote/improve them).
Above, I've described how, if I'm wrong on the GM side, I'll stop. From my perspective as a player, given planbot and linking to the subplans in the top-level plan, it's less work to engage with a series of short, simple subplans. In particular, if I have a disagreement in one part with a plan maintainer, without a modular plan, I have to make an entirely new plan that's the same except in one place and now everyone has to diff two mostly-identical plans and that's more work than only engaging with the bits that's different. It's so much more work that it's the main thing that keeps me from voting.
If most of the thread finds modular plans taking more work disagree, I'll stop.
