dividing maps by quality

[nomadian]

Lets say you had section like Top quality maps, average quality, below average. Or some categories maybe not so derogatory such as below average if a map isn't very good(generally like mine) but you get the idea. The reason would be to allow maps that aren't very good but time and effort has clearly been put into it to be put into the below average so those people get their maps on the site, and to distinct those maps that are special, or top-notch quality with the highest category.

The person responsible for deciding the category will be the person who approved the map but perhaps there could be flags where users could nominate if a map should be put in another section or not. Ie. if a map was in the top section and got like 10 selections to be placed in a lower section then maybe it would be moved. And vica versa with a map placed in a lower section.

Thoughts?

 

[DesKaladA]

no
i feel that is a bad way of reveiweing maps

what if i became a moderator for the maps section and called your map below average? how would that make you feel? i don't think you would like it. evan know Ralle is rewriting the resource section( so i'm told). so truly its his final say

 

[nomadian]

Sorry I did explain "below average" probably wasn't the best way of wording. All I'm trying to suggest is like a hierarchy of quality of maps. I don't know what is better? Low/medium/high quality?

 

[donut3.5]

You can always search by Rating, not by Upload Date.
--donut3.5--

 

[Wolverabid]

Our webmaster is indeed presently revising the resource sections: when he exterminates any bugs and is satisfied that his new scripts will perform well, the new section(s) will be unveiled, starting with the model section.

To the best of my understanding, the new sections will include an entirely separate rating system for resource moderators, in addition to the current all-user rating system.

The new rating categories will of course include the existing Ignored and Unapproved categories; Resource moderators will also be able to further categorize Approved resources into: Unrecommended, Recommended and Directors Choice. (Ralle can correct me if I'm wrong.)

 

[nomadian]

good stuff, sounds promising.

 

[1)ark_NiTe]

The new rating categories will of course include the existing Ignored and Unapproved categories; Resource moderators will also be able to further categorize Approved resources into: Unrecommended, Recommended and Directors Choice. (Ralle can correct me if I'm wrong.)

Heh, I was just about to reply, or we could have a section called "Director's Choice" how wc3sear.ch did. But hey, Ralle beat me to it!

 

[Captain Griffen]

That would require someone to DO the reviewing. Given the level of map submissions, I don't see that being particularly practicable.

 

[1)ark_NiTe]

It is. The better maps do stand out a lot more than those that don't, and therefore would be easier to find and review. When there is a lot of chatter on the forums or in the chat about a map, it is generally one that is worthy of being looked at!

 

[Earth-Fury]

what if i became a moderator for the maps section and called your map below average? how would that make you feel?

It would make them feel like they got their map reviewd by me.

 

[DesKaladA]

Ok...
beside that

I'm trying to get wahtshisfase to show some symphty