I must have missed something, but did some dramatic event happen that caused the admin to slash the design slots for cartels, or am I just crazy and they've always been that way?

If you mean the yearly amount allowed, that's a variable one, depending on the current workload/queue backlog of the Charites, I believe.

They aren't getting any new Charites?

They seemed to have gotten new Charites for a short time, but now it looks like they're backlogged again. You could always email support@lusternia, that's what I did during the first backlog to find out why.

I don't do Charite work, but there's no great mystery to it.

We all have lives outside the game. Sometimes we have more time for Lusternia, sometimes we have less. Reviewing designs is labour-intensive: if people become busy, it's one of the things that suffer.

It's also overwhelmingly tedious. It certainly wouldn't be coming at the top of my to do list.

I'm not saying Charites can't have lives, I was just wondering if something had happened

Maybe there could be player-charites? Like there are player-builders? I know I wouldn't mind spending an hour or two a day reviewing designs for grammar and spelling errors, and the other things that need to be checked over before being stamped for approval. And I'm sure there are other people that feel the same way.

Maybe set up a volunteer thing like the Fate Guides. I'm sure people would sign up for it, hell I'd volunteer to look at designs for a few hours a day.

I would totally apply to be a player Charite too. I love looking at and editing designs, and I would love to help out in any way possible!

I agree with them. I know a lot of people who would want to help

You need to weigh the upsides (quick design approval and, probably if not significantly, less of a drain of administrative time) against the downsides:

(1) the initial (and quite considerable) coding time that will be required to develop a system for charite-players and automating payment;
(2) the heavy level of supervision that would be required for new and inexperienced player-charites, and the continuing level of medium-duty supervision that would be required for the others; and
(3) the problem that (unlike builders and unlike guides), player-charite decisions will have immediate ramifications on other players, and that players cannot be relied on to behave impartially with other players.

Number 3 is the one that really sinks it. It's the reason why ephemerals wait months before they have any customer-contact. Lusternia is a game that runs at a very high temperature. At any given time there are a whole bunch of feuds, and it's entirely reasonable that there should be - indeed, it is indicative of a healthy rather than stagnant game. But this is a problem when you want actively-engaged players to exercise an administrative function: there is a significant element of discretion in Charite work and it is imperative that that discretion should be exercised impartially.

So is it worth it? I think it would be worth a try. But I don't think it's without risk and that risk has to be weighed against the significant coding time that would be required to set the thing up in the first instance.

But what are my views worth anyway! I'm, at best, an armchair Charite and so I suspect I lack the locus standi to cut much ice on the subject upstairs.

It's not like people sign their names to the designs they send in, for the most part. ( an exception would be Rattusk, you can always recognise his designs)

Actually you do, or just about. Most people who work with designs for any real length of time can about spot anyone's work from a mile away. Everyone has a distinctive style.

Aetolia had (maybe still has, I haven't logged in there in ages) something like this. Mortal approvers have their approvals checked by an admin, and if they agree, the approver gains points, and if they disagree, they lose points. Get enough points and you start having some of your approvals go through without double-checking. Eventually, if your approvals are consistently in agreement with the divine, you can get to where 9/10 or so of your approvals happen without divine double-checks, but there's always some being spot-checked.

During the time I was an active crafter (again, this was long ago) it seemed to work fine, and despite Aetolia's tendency towards rancor that makes Lusternia even as it is now seem friendly by comparison, there wasn't much if any problem with people being inappropriately harsh towards "the other side" designs, at least that I saw. The system could have used a few tweaks (your points should have decayed if you stopped approving for a while, for instance) but it seemed to work.

Of course, it would take some work to code such a thing.

Actually Aetolia's system changed a bit. Insta turned into a double-weight, and now all designs just need 3 mortal approvals. The system, however, does work well, BUT it requires lots of clarification from admin on what's ok, what is meeting guidelines and what isn't, and crafters occasionally snipe at each other. Could save a lot of time in the long run, but expect to have a news section full of lots of clarifying posts for approvals.

When we get backed up in designs, I've often pondered some sort of player process to help approvals. Then we clear the backlog and I forget about it. I hesitate because of the oversight required and, yes, coding a new system would be challenging as well (since we're spread thin as it is). However, I do kind of like the three approver idea. Yes, we'd have to have strict guidelines and expect the approvers to follow them to the letter.