- Joined
- Feb 24, 2007
- Messages
- 1,098
did anyone consider my post on the previous page?
Dividing the maps by players?
that'd give room for more map moderators as well.
Dividing the maps by players?
that'd give room for more map moderators as well.
What moderators? Regardless of any modifications to the map section, it still needs moderators.As much room as it'd give the map moderators, it wouldn't make their job easier.
If you have 20 trigger enhanced abilities, you could fit them all into 1 trigger with several if statements, but why would you?* Your map should not contain unnecesary trigger work, if you have three triggers and you could fit it in one, that is highly not acceptable
Why? Maps can look beautiful using a single tileset.* Your map should contain at least three or four different tilesets, varying tilesets is a important thing
My idea of "perfect" scripting is clean written, efficient JASS. However, later in your post it seems like GUI is also acceptable:* Your map has to have atleast 60% of the imagined "perfect scripting"
* Your map may not contain fatal GUI leaks. Read about it here: Things That Leak
You require as little triggers as possible, yet there is still a requirement of 20? A standard RTS map could turn out great without using any.* Your map should contain at least 20 triggers, that work fine, considering the map type
You require excessive object editor work (many custom abilties, units, buffs, etc...), yet the map should still load within 20 seconds. That is a ridiculously short time for a map with as much objects as you ask for.* Your map should not have more than a 20 second loading time for an average computer 4 years old
That is too dependant on the map type. A storyline for a map such as an AoS is not very important.* Your map should have a good, solid story
Contradictive enough?* Your map should have custom models/skins/icons/effects
* Your map should have a minimap image: Always
* Your map should not have more than 2MB for a multiplayer AoE, Defense, Arena type map
* Your map should not have more than 5MB for a multiplayer RPG, ORPG
* Your map should not have more then 20MB for a campaign
* Your map should not have more than 3MB for a singleplayer RPG
* Your map should not have more than 1.5MB for any regular singleplayer map
i think it would work because it would lower the clutter of maps the actually map moderates have to deal with and then player comments actually countA person uploads a map
V
Mini moderate approval/Disapprove (Or 2 players rate above a certain #) Rank - Psending
V
Actually Moderates Approval/Disapprove Rank - Rated (#)
Using rating system to approve/reject resources is not a good idea since there is a lot of downrater who love to downrate resources belong to their enemy just to satisfied their revenge. I always get that and I still have fans who loves to downrate my resources without provide any valid reason.
It is recommend the current rating system for user to be.
1) Abolish
2) Only can be use by trustable member
3) If user vote a resources rating 1-2, they have to state their reason and their reason would appear at the map main post.
Next time, it would be better for someone who actually knows anything WE scripting to talk about what's required for a script.
Nice way of telling: "You completely failed". I do know scripting, atleast GUI, if by scripting you refer to JASS no I don't know JASS, but GUI I'm excellent at.
If you think you can do it better, go ahead give it a shot. It was just a short concept, sketch to be exact.
GUI isn't scripting.
Anyhow, he's referring to the fact that you are writing guidelines for Jass when you don't know anything about it, and thus the guidelines are arbitrary and nonsensical.
There is no way to detect new potential mini-moderators, since they cannot comment
Possible pressure on the mini-moderators, and perhaps lack of diversity.
Possible pressure on the mini-moderators, and perhaps lack of diversity.
Possible pressure on the mini-moderators, and perhaps lack of diversity.
I would like to hear more about this con. Can you Rui define?Rui said:Fans are unable to report bugs
I would like to hear more about this con.
Well, I don't like that...Normal users cannot vote or and comment maps I think, just the mini mods so users cannnot post bugs.
I think.
Then I should either start to whine hosted project again
You think I just gave up that easily, hmm? I know when to retreat and strike again! I will eventually start to whine sooner or later. But because if this is going to happen, I'll have to start to whine sooner... I don't know yet. But at least when the beta is out I will once again open the drama. I just love drama, don't you?CMarket said:God no! As much as it was fun seeing Poot own you across all four corners of the Mozilla Firefox application window it would be wise to not open that Pandora's box again.
Seriously is this a joke ?* Fans are unable to report bugs(thanks to Zelda.Alex for mentioning)
* There is no way to detect new potential mini-moderators, since they cannot comment
* Possible pressure on the mini-moderators, and perhaps lack of diversity.
Creating a mini-moderator review field is basically... the voting system. Making it mini-moderator-exclusive is an idea.(...)
Make a mini mod review field and a user review field, or a bug report box like a voting box. Mini mods can see the bug report box/user review box and thus see if someone is potential enough.
(...).
I don't really like the idea. It doesn't sound all that bad, but I just don't like it. Again, it puts some pressure on the mini-moderators. The users also make up a large wave of feedback, so I'd prefer not to using this idea, even if we only experiment with it.(...)
Edit2: Maybe make it that users can comment on only approved maps?
Not entirely. I forgot to say, we can still track potential people on the Map Development forum, but it is harder.. . . *facepalm*. Do I even need to comment?There is no way to detect new potential mini-moderators, since they cannot comment
This would make the system entirely useless.
(...)
Be reminded that it was only a suggestion, more of a collection of the conclusions we have reached during this debate.Seriously is this a joke ?* Fans are unable to report bugs(thanks to Zelda.Alex for mentioning)
* There is no way to detect new potential mini-moderators, since they cannot comment
* Possible pressure on the mini-moderators, and perhaps lack of diversity.
I am quite stunned that you fail to understand that users and the mainstream of projects, and that maps in project development section have high chances of being ignored by the simple fact they are not completed yet. I talk by self experience, after having my project in development section, I decided to submit it. Difference: users go to submitted maps to find a map they like to play and if they like it, they become fans and they help. Some members of my team (such as Anachron) started out as members with a simple post "Hey I like your map". I know i wouldn't have his help in development section.
Removing this voice (the fans voice) will inevitably decrease the user activity in THW and will decrease the amount of submitted projects - even the good ones.
(...)
There will also be a cut on the new staff, when mods resign, you will have no one to choose from. If it is already difficult for mods to find successors or helpers (remembers me Hanky) you will make this task impossible.
I agree mini-mods should be back, however having them back does NOT imply to have these cons, users and mini-mods can get along fine.
As an adept of constructive criticism, I do have something to say, as I refuse to make a critic without a suggestion.If nobody has anything else to say, I'll send Ralle a private message about this.
Rui should be above that. As a director he shouldn't be concerned about a particular section (such as maps), that is the work for map mods, he should be concerned about more important things for the community. There is a reason why God created mods.- I think Rui's idea is to have several Mini Mods and him being the only one that can actually approve/reject
Writing notes or giving the creator the power of choice will only make the process even slower. What if the creator doesn't answer because he doesn't care? His crap map will be for ever in submissions because mini-mods are waiting an answer. Besides this increases the idea of lost maps, maps that should have been removed or moved, but they weren't and people just forgot about them. Spell section currently has that problem, and I don't think that replicating it into maps section would be a good idea.- Move a map to the project development? It would take some time, you could rather write a note to the user that he should make a topic there and work on the map before re submitting, that gives the user to chose by himself and it won't be more work for the mod himself
We should specify:- I think that Mini Mods should be given the power to reject the really low maps, but not to approve, as 3 T-Ups would be needed for a approval
We should specify:
1 T-Up map: the mini mod can remove it immediately without asking permission
2 T-UP map: the map should be moved to project development section because it has a chance of being approved, it just needs more work. The mini-mod should talk to the mod to see if it is worth doing so, or should move it right away
3 T-Up map: Seems good for approval, after a discussion with the mod with the parameters indicated in my lats post.
4 and 5 T-UP: The mod should check if the rating is correct and fair.
Seriously, did you even read my cons? Just do it...if you allow only mini mods to vote than you have the problem of stressing the mini mods.
Downgrade in your opinion, not in mine. Just live with it, I refuse to give cinematics same grade as I do to maps because a good map is obviously harder to do than a good cinematic.sound familiar?
I consider T-Ups like starts, a map with 1 star should not be allowed imo because it must e bad.reject a map that has a T-Down?
I like the idea, but when should a mini.mod (or a mod) delete a map immediatly ? 1 star? 2 stars ?Anyway, a user gets a automated PM that he should get him map in the Map Development Forum and that his map was deleted. The map wouldn't be left standing there it would be rejected imidiatly.
you tried to justify yourself. Unfortunately, you're trying to justify yourself judging a movie with the standards you'd subject a game to. You're pretty much saying "Y'know, Psycho isn't that good a thriller, I mean, who cares about all the direction and stuff, it didn't have wicked sweet special effects and stuff like that"
In summery, You fail. You are a miserable failure of a reviewer trying to justify yourself judging an apple with the same specifications you'd judge an orange - Mecheon
1st - you did go off topicI don't want to go off topic, but I would just like to say that
Then why the hell are you posting?To get back on topic I believe that there is no ideal solution.
I am admired, first you are retard enough to escape an example of irony and second, you start flaming me as well. Seriously, you may have more rep points, but you are still a newb and I really don't have time nor patience to start a flame war.Actually you are the only one who is flaming, but I guess that suits your name, right? After all you are Flame Phoenix. I was just proclaiming that people, failures at reviewing mind you, who rate apples using the criteria of rating oranges exist, as Mecheon pointed out, and believe you me he knows what he's talking about. You probably ignored the fact that he posted that originally.
Since you're the one who first started arguing semantics I'll meet you half way. There are 90 posts in this thread, above mine. Even if you posted every single one of those posts you couldn't reach the number 100. Furthermore, where exactly have you said that most users of the Hive should be able to vote normally, but only to deny this right to previous felons or new members?
But whatever, I don't want to argue with a stubborn jerk like yourself, especially not in this thread.
Well, we haven't yet reached a consent to what option is the best for the mini-moderators.Rui, so we got seven pages of lets call it a "discussion", I was wondering where have we gotten so far? Could you sum up some ideas you find well enough and post them, and have you contacted Ralle about the mini-mod reinstalment matter?
Thanks in advance, bounty hunter2
Most of the times, maps are reviewed way too fast, and that is also a problem. But if that doesn't happen, we could as well have all maps approved by default, and have another group of "reviewed/certified" maps, though I'm not sure if I want that.Regarding my last post's last paragraph.
I meant that the map can be allowed to remain non-reviewed by the mini-mods for some time (say 1 month). In this time the users who play this map can give their comments on the map. After the specified time period is over the mini-mod can take a look over the comments. if the comments include some quality post regarding the map's bugs and other things then mini-mod can use these and a quick look over the map by the world editor to give a brief review concerning the basic requirements of the map or any other thing he may find suitable.( if there is not any quality post then he will just have to go the usual way to review the map ,of course and give full review). after the quick review the mini-mod can leave the map's in-depth review for some time till he can find enough time for a full review. that will save the mod some time.
I do not mean that the map's approval has to be based on the basis of user's comments. Many a times the comments are hyped. Those posts should not be considered as the part of mini-mods concern regarding the brief review. Only the posts which appear to the mini-mod as real testing or critique or like those should be considered.
Suggestion regarding the rating of the maps by users.
1......As already has been suggested give a minimum word limit as the explanation of the rating. But i wanted to add something to this. Those explanations for the ratings should be made viewable by all the users. That way if someone just spams then it can be reported. Also give the mods power to take out any single rating they find having any insufficient or improper explanation.
2.......Change the rating system x/5 by x/10. That can help users to give better ratings. Sometimes mods give rating x/10 but then replace them with an nearly equivalent rating x/5. This can help.
3........This concerns a change in the User Profile which can help better ratings by the users. Make the rating given by a user to the resources be viewable in the user profile. That way the people who give rating either too low or too high for inappropriate reasons can be identified and their rating be taken away from the resources. It can also help users to review their rating. If the point 1 is implemented then make the comments be also viewable on user profile.