Map Section issues {A message to all map "reviewers".}

[Grey Nightmare]

Didn't CWeener get made a map mod...?

 

[ap0calypse]

As said before, she's gone AWOL (Away Without Official Leave).

 

[dead-man-walking]

The DC section of this site is a joke. I DL all of them just to see what those mappers were doing 'right' and half the maps I downloaded were complete crap and the rest were just 'meh'. There was only 1 that could even be considered as being a contestant for a DC. But I do agree with you, I don't know if I have yet played a single map that was good enough in all aspects of the game to be given a DC.

Most of them are, figuratively speaking, older than dirt. They suck now but years ago they are much better than most maps out there.

What would you expect from something out from early 2009 anyway?

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

No one ever seems to DC anything anymore, especially in the map section where it's barely modded atm

 

[Crazed_seal2]

I wouldnt want to a review a map lately with that exploit thing.
So the map reviewers goto take special precautions when dling and playing a map

 

[Ironside]

Not really, just check the startup folder when finish testing the map and you're good to go.

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

Just don't test anything optimized/protected, you should be able to notice something's a bit odd with the code they need to do that sort of thing (maps completely in GUI should be safe).

 

[Septimus]

The DC section of this site is a joke. I DL all of them just to see what those mappers were doing 'right' and half the maps I downloaded were complete crap and the rest were just 'meh'. There was only 1 that could even be considered as being a contestant for a DC. But I do agree with you, I don't know if I have yet played a single map that was good enough in all aspects of the game to be given a DC.

But to be honest, I don't know who would want the job. I haven't been here long,

Obvious answer for your confusion.

If you ever check the date of the map, you would notice most of the map was extremely old/ancient and the map quality restriction at the past was extremely low/lenient. As someone else has said, they are the best during the past. Of course, as time goes there is definitely a much better quality map.

Also, if a map is reported for stealing, then I have to go download several maps (yesterday I even had to download 8 maps to be sure), compare them carefully etc.
This is my duty, and it's actually one of the things I like most because I do not want to see any stolen map on the hive.
I also need to read entire threads a day, searching for both good and useless comments so I can take appropriate actions.

That is why I have been proposing to Ralle all the time to update the rules where the map must be 100% originally make by yourself and not another piece of edited shit back when I was map moderator (Which Ralle reject it). Cause no matter how good a map was edited, it was often hard to determine if it was stolen or not.

 

[GIANT_CRAB]

Cause no matter how good a map was edited, it was often hard to determine if it was stolen or not.

World, is not peaceful at all.
We steal because of our greediness, or because we are lazy and just want credits.
We protect our map, because we are afraid of people who steal, this creates fear.
When there is fear, there will be no happiness..
However, these things make all of us unique.
So we must no blame all these, we just have to continue our life on.
But this doesn't mean we just do whatever we want to.
We must TRY to do what is best for all of us, and bring peace to the world.
We must also balance the world.
Love, care and help everyone, even if its your enemy, we must learn to forgive and forget.
Hopefully, these things we do will bring world peace.

 

[Lambdadelta]

We protect our map, because we are afraid of people who steal, this creates fear.

No, we optimize our map to reduce the filesize and other crap. It only stops no-brains from accessing our map, the rest will be able to edit and modify our maps. Example case being with Jesus4Lyf and Samurai Legends: Legacy.

 

[GIANT_CRAB]

It only stops no-brains from accessing our map

How can you say that?

Thats really bad.

 

[ap0calypse]

How can you say that?

Thats really bad.

It's true, everyone can deprotect a map...

 

[-Kobas-]

To make things worse you can just add few lines of code into map without deprotecting it! Then while playing game with simple commands increase hero stats, add gold and so on (CHEATS ^^)

 

[PurplePoot]

No, we optimize our map to reduce the filesize and other crap. It only stops no-brains from accessing our map, the rest will be able to edit and modify our maps. Example case being with Jesus4Lyf and Samurai Legends: Legacy.

Indeed, deprotecting takes anywhere from a minute to half an hour but it's really easy.

 

[GIANT_CRAB]

It's true, everyone can deprotect a map...

I know, but he said stop no brains people.

He should say,"It only stops people who have a lower knowledge than others"

 

[The World Is Flat]

oh please, bots dont make cheesy moral judgments.

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

If you're optimizing your map for any reason other then space it's a bit dumb anyway, many people end up losing their own maps in this way accidentally deleting the normal version and then lacking the skills to de-protect the optimized one.

Edit:
http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/1787023-post2.html

Look, they are multiplying. Basically new people come to the site and feel they need to contribute in some way, see that some people say that sort of thing and BAM! instant self-gratification in that they are actually doing some "constructive" for the site.

 

[Vosty]

Hmm, until reading this thread, I didn't realize their was a new exploit.
Thank you for discouraging me from playing b.net everyone.

Anyway this problem proves to be extremely hard to eliminate. I mean, mods can clean thread after thread there is no way of preventing this in the first place. What if posts in review sections had to take the shape of a form? Sorta like Septimus's old map reviewing system. By making users fill out a full post, they might be dicouraged. It's not fully fullproof, but it might reduce some load at bit. By making certain areas required to be filled in, post would not only be less trolly and generally more helpful. Of course, this takes some recoding obviously, and would not be very backwards compatible, but those are all issues to be cleaned up after. Basically it would have some small sub-sections like pros, cons, each with a few different sections, like gameplay, terrain, replay value, creativity etcera. Maybe with a bug report section on the bottom. Unless someone was really determined to fill in every single line with, "This map blows," things should clear up significantly, no?
Tell me what you think, or don't. Really it all comes down to the mod's decision anyway.

 

[GhostThruster]

Sounds good, though I dunno if Ralle can implement it.

 

[Adiktuz]

People just flame about descriptions to flame.
Even if that wasn't considered important in the rules, people would still complain about it. Look at the people who do that, most of them never say anything positive, or anything on maps that could be approved - they just go find something with a bad description and start saying things like fail to satisfy their own egos, they enjoy being douche bags.

It's not a problem with the rules, it's a problem with the people.

the only problem is that, people have different standards of a "good" description...

and I think it was placed on the rules as a way to help moderators moderate the maps, since they couldn't possibly download every map and test them to moderate, especially maps that are not playable in SP...

 

[ap0calypse]

Anyway this problem proves to be extremely hard to eliminate. I mean, mods can clean thread after thread there is no way of preventing this in the first place. What if posts in review sections had to take the shape of a form? Sorta like Septimus's old map reviewing system. By making users fill out a full post, they might be dicouraged. It's not fully fullproof, but it might reduce some load at bit. By making certain areas required to be filled in, post would not only be less trolly and generally more helpful. Of course, this takes some recoding obviously, and would not be very backwards compatible, but those are all issues to be cleaned up after. Basically it would have some small sub-sections like pros, cons, each with a few different sections, like gameplay, terrain, replay value, creativity etcera. Maybe with a bug report section on the bottom. Unless someone was really determined to fill in every single line with, "This map blows," things should clear up significantly, no?
Tell me what you think, or don't. Really it all comes down to the mod's decision anyway.

And what about bug-reporting, general info, updates, problems opening the map etc?
Posting bugs is useful, and doesn't require you to say anything else.
If the author wants to release some patch updates, he also just has to list them.
The list goes on...

And if you then advice us to make buttons (so you can choose between "review", "bug report" etc), then those buttons can be abused the same way the "quick post" button can be abused, which won't help afaik.

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

Who'd be willing to moderate that system anyway?
We only have 1 active map mod anyway

 

[Glorn2]

Also, as annoying as it may be, it is the stupid posts and the "baddies" who keep this forum rolling for the forum owners. A lot of the more elite players will endure the bullshit and keep doing what they do. If you discourage new members from posting ideas, maps, suggestions, bugs, ECT; then fewer people will join the community.

From the point of view of 99% of the people here; having less "baddies" would be a good thing. 1 outta 10 "baddies" grows up into a valuable member of the community. The other "baddies" still add content to the forum and create activity.

It would really be in the worse interest of the forum to spend many hours recoding a system that will limit the activity of the forum.

 

[Vosty]

Who'd be willing to moderate that system anyway?
We only have 1 active map mod anyway

This is the most blameable part of the system. To be curious, why is there only 1? I know Cweener worked hard to get the post and then left, but what about everyone else?
I know for a fact there are plenty of people here who want to and could moderate maps, if not a forum.

 

[ap0calypse]

This is the most blameable part of the system. To be curious, why is there only 1? I know Cweener worked hard to get the post and then left, but what about everyone else?
I know for a fact there are plenty of people here who want to and could moderate maps, if not a forum.

I already appointed one other member as a map mod (in fact: at the same time I appointed CWeener), but still haven't hear anything from Ralle.
I wouldn't know who else is capable of becoming a map moderator (or even moderating an entire forum), please tell me who it is you think of.

 

[ChoovakPetri83]

Agree. With Boris.

 

[Vosty]

I already appointed one other member as a map mod (in fact: at the same time I appointed CWeener), but still haven't hear anything from Ralle.
I wouldn't know who else is capable of becoming a map moderator (or even moderating an entire forum), please tell me who it is you think of.

Hmm. Not any specific person comes to mind, since I don't visit the map section often, but if you were to put out there that there is an open post, you probably could get people to work towards that post. A user doesn't have to be here that long to moderate the map section, as long as they know what maps to remove. It's not like they can do much damage with only resource mod powers.

 

[Zombie]

If they're both willing, why not both?

//\\0o//\\

They have a certain negative history during their past moderator career.

I on the other hand agree with this: Masterhaosis,

Also, lol @ how this thread is still going.

 

[Boris_Spider]

They have a certain negative history during their past moderator career.

Ah, I see.

//\\oo//\\

 

[Rui]

(...)
Maybe because we expect the staff to be a little more autonomous and vigilante, not only taking action if it's reported? It's not a police office after all, it's tad easier to keep track of and take action against violations than having to carry out a full-scale investigation, yet they very rarely take action if it's not reported.
(...)

The explanation for that is: we can't be everywhere. On slightly-more-than-rare occasions, we will catch situations of wrong social conduct before it turns to something graver, but the bottom line is that we don't act because we don't come across them. As for the Map Section, it's already hard enough to moderate the pending maps, let alone moderate the comments for each one of them.

(...) If you really want to hear my suggestion (I know to no avail since it'll never get seriously considered), get a moderator who only deals with user commentaries to maps and not maps themselves until the situation is resolved.

This is a good idea, but who would be up for this job?

---

(...) and do people actually tell them "to get laid" ?

It's the first time I come across a comment like that, but apparently yes. Refer to the first post.

---

(...)
If I was a mod (or If i even get to be one), I'd consider firstly playing the map a couple of times, read the description then, and then write a review. I wouldn't look at the posts below. (...)

It's a recurring pattern. People feel like you do when they're outside, and they think they're going to be the most hard-working moderator of all time. That is until they start feeling the monotony and eventual fatigue. Then it just becomes a repetitive and annoying job.

I actually think there're people judging maps by the minimap... Which is just ridiculous!

Certain map types, from which, for example, the cinematic genre is excluded and the melee definitely included, can be evaluated quality-wise through the minimap. I frequently did a pre-evaluation based on the minimap before playing and I was annoyed by how often I was right.

---

Nearly all of the reviews I see are based on the minimap/description, which only serve as a means of advertising said map/game. It's one thing if a map is poorly advertised, but to pass/fail it without playing it (opening it in WC or WE is not playing it) simply because the ads fail to appeal, is the problem.
(...)

(...)
And for descriptions... They play a major role as well. The description will be the judge wether you will get other users or non-users to download your map or not. (...)

It could be interpreted as a mere demonstration of what happens when the map's description isn't appellative enough. Whilst on most websites a good description is recommended, at the Hive we turn that "should" into a "must", though I may agree that most freelancer map reviewers here, at the Hive, have taken this to a ridiculously exaggerated extreme.

(...) Of course, as Ap0c mentioned, the number of people that are capable of serving as a map mod are few. (They'd need to be 'skilled' (poor word choice, but best I have currently) in GUI/VJass/JASS, terraining, tech trees, balancing, etc...)

Actually, I prefer map moderators who are good at criticizing in general.
Upon reviewing a map, the lag or absence of it is a factor, and will certainly weight on the vote, but the reviewer doesn't have to know triggering, even though the map lagging or not is usually the result of the map author's triggering/coding expertise.
It helps to have knowledge on the World Editor, but as strange as it may seem, it is not a mandatory attribute for a map moderator in my eyes.

---

(...)
I did not mean the quality of maps but the quality of reviews. These could be punished. Of course, that would deter people and lower activity. But we are talking about fairly considerable excesses here.
(...)

The destructive criticism shown in Zombie's first post will usually be classified as trolling and dealt with as such.

---

Fair doos. I would be. =/
I must say considering the amount of admins, they do seem to take very little interest in threads like this, and don't anyone flame/bullshit with me they have lives and/or it's a big site. I've been an admin and part of several sites/projects/w/e.
It doesn't take long to click on a thread like such, read a few posts and comment a line or two. (what 10mins? if that)
And if you don't have time to do that, frankly you shouldn't be performing that duty.
(...)

As a matter of fact, I took 4 hours, not counting the breaks I took between the 5 hours that have passed since I've «clicked» this thread, to read all the posts on these 12 pages. Today I had the time because I'm on holidays; on a normal school period, I do not have that time.

---

(...)
Then again, the staff's job should be to look into such issues, so users don't have to voice an opinion, since if that happens it's already bad. Not only doesn't it produce anything of value, it also shows how out of control things really are.

Things are out of control, and that's only natural in a website with this activity scale. Like I already wrote, we can't be everywhere.

---

(...)
Hmmmm how is the spell section doing on moderators? You could try giving some of them double duty to make up for the lack of map mods, they require a lot of the same skills (of course maps are more all around more demanding but you get the point). But if the spell section is having the same issues then that's not really worth it

How many Icon moderators are there?

Personally -- though I'm always bound to the opinion of the "counsel" of administrators --, I wouldn't dispense anyone, from any sector, to work on the Map Section. The fact that the Spells section's pending list is increasing only supports my point: activity dividing is a wrong way to fix things -- we needed someone to tag the reports (reports have a considerable flux, too), so we drew TriggerHappy from the Spells section and put him on it. Five pages of unmoderated spells is the result.
Fixing a problem is of little worth if we create another problem in the process, especially when the new/second problem is in a resource section.

No one ever seems to DC anything anymore, especially in the map section where it's barely modded atm

Because, frankly, most maps are not good enough. I recently gave a director's cut to TKoK because, in the middle of the hack'n'slashing of RPGs, I actually had some fun playing TKoK, and the execution, in almost every side, is nearly perfect -- nearly perfect, but compared to other RPGs, TKoK is the best of its type, as were, in their time, the maps that are currently on our director's choice.

---

(...)
I know for a fact there are plenty of people here who want to and could moderate maps, if not a forum.

On the «want to» part, I completely agree with you. The «could do» part is up for discussion.


~Thread cleaned (30 posts deleted)

 

[ap0calypse]

Actually, I prefer map moderators who are good at criticizing in general.
Upon reviewing a map, the lag or absence of it is a factor, and will certainly weight on the vote, but the reviewer doesn't have to know triggering, even though the map lagging or not is usually the result of the map author's triggering/coding expertise.
It helps to have knowledge on the World Editor, but as strange as it may seem, it is not a mandatory attribute for a map moderator in my eyes.

This is the only statement I slightly disagree with.

A spawn-based map with a massive amount of leaks is - in my eyes - not acceptable (thus I set it to rejected until updated if the rest is good enough).
This is because it will severely affect the mid-late gameplay, but not at the beginning.
Moderators don't always play a long time, so someone without the knowledge of triggers will not notice any lag in the few minutes he played, yet there will be lag later in the game.
I've also seen TD's where they converted the triggers to JASS to 'solve the problem' (or so fewer people would know about it), so a moderator must also have a minimum of JASS knowledge

I do agree that the quality of criticizing is far more important, but I wouldn't discard trigger knowledge like that.

 

[Zombie]

Rui, I realize that. I also realize the staff is clueless on whom to promote to provide assistance in the map section. Since this thread was purged, I will suggest it again:

Let users apply for a moderator/assistant position and ffs demote them if they wash up/go inactive. The one/two active map mods we have already could surveillance their conduct.

There's a huge flaw with this "we pick you and consider yourself honored" thing if as you said, the staff cannot constantly pay attention to everything, including the case of new potential.

 

[Rui]

(...)
Moderators don't always play a long time, so someone without the knowledge of triggers will not notice any lag in the few minutes he played, yet there will be lag later in the game.
I've also seen TD's where they converted the triggers to JASS to 'solve the problem' (or so fewer people would know about it), so a moderator must also have a minimum of JASS knowledge
(...)

Not playing long enough is the fault of the map reviewer. If you're playing the map, you might as well do so until the end. Given that most maps are protected, whether or not you possess expertise on triggering and coding is irrelevant because, in the end, you didn't get to late game to know that there is lag.

As for the false-problem-solving issue, I don't usually emend my reviews when a new version is submitted, so what the author does after I have submitted my review is no longer of my concern. As such, I note the version of the map I'm reviewing on my comments.

If I may reformulate what I stated, World Editor knowledge is not an obligatory attribute, but I recognize that it is indeed important. Although a map moderator of the past has stood by the principle that we should only tell the author what needs improvement and not suggest how to do so, I believe we should do both.

Rui, I realize that. I also realize the staff is clueless on whom to promote to provide assistance in the map section. Since this thread was purged, I will suggest it again:

Let users apply for a moderator/assistant position and ffs demote them if they wash up/go inactive. The one/two active map mods we have already could surveillance their conduct.

There's a huge flaw with this "we pick you and consider yourself honored" thing if as you said, the staff cannot constantly pay attention to everything, including the case of new potential.

I'm not sure who passed the idea that it is an «honor», but for me, it is a responsibility, just like you stated it to be, in one of your posts [not (fully) quoted by me], and of considerable importance; as such, I do not feel comfortable promoting just any volunteer for the job.
But I'm still listening (reading) if you have more arguments to convince me =P

 

[Zombie]

I'm not sure who passed the idea that it is an «honor», but for me, it is a responsibility, just like you stated it to be, in one of your posts [not (fully) quoted by me], and of considerable importance; as such, I do not feel comfortable promoting just any volunteer for the job.
But I'm still listening (reading) if you have more arguments to convince me =P

Sure, once you're in the staff, your approach changes on things but trust me, a lot of people just see the title at first and the "prestige" it brings. One of the reasons why there's no possibility to volunteer.

And I never said that you should instantly promote random applicants to moderators, of course there should be a period of surveillance. Make a thread saying that people interested in helping the map section now have the chance to apply for it. Give them a questionnaire then tell them to go and comment X maps which the already existing moderators would surveillance.

It'd be a trial, something which is not really my job to establish point by point, not just an appointment and a title by request. Once they pass it, then you can go ahead and give the guys an actual title and privileges.

Certainly more efficient than what the current practice is, especially if the staff sees no one competent.

 

[ap0calypse]

Sure, once you're in the staff, your approach changes on things but trust me, a lot of people just see the title at first and the "prestige" it brings. One of the reasons why there's no possibility to volunteer.

Hehh, 'prestige' - I like the way you said it
You're right though, for everyone who hasn't been a mod before, it does look like it makes you renowned throughout the hive.

And I never said that you should instantly promote random applicants to moderators, of course there should be a period of surveillance. Make a thread saying that people interested in helping the map section now have the chance to apply for it. Give them a questionnaire then tell them to go and comment X maps which the already existing moderators would surveillance.

It'd be a trial, something which is not really my job to establish point my point, not just an appointment and a title by request. Once they pass it, then you can go ahead and give the guys an actual title and privileges.

Certainly more efficient than what the current practice is, especially if the staff sees no one competent.

I kind-of agree with this...
I know of a few people who don't necessarily make the best map mod, but can certainly manage to moderate some maps.
Besides, they can also learn from that experience.

There's one thing that bothers me here, it doesn't feel right, giving people you wouldn't make a real moderator a... sort of intern moderator, with all privileges given to real mods.

 

[Ironside]

That way doesn't work, if anything in that sense, the moderators know those who might be capable of doing it, and those would get the chance, then the moderator sees if they are capable of doing it or not.

 

[Zombie]

That way doesn't work, if anything in that sense, the moderators know those who might be capable of doing it, and those would get the chance, then the moderator sees if they are capable of doing it or not.

I wish I could be equally idealistic.

 

[Rui]

This is a little deviated from the initial topic, do you mind me changing the title?

I also have a suggestion that I'd like to propose our staff. But I guess there's no harm in discussing it publicly.
You know the thread auto-closing system, which locks the thread after a certain period of inactivity? I was thinking of a similar system for our Map Section, but hold on, don't panic yet, let me explain.
Ralle was about to implement a system in which only comments/posts designated as "reviews" by moderators would count as a vote or a rating, I'm not sure which anymore. Nevertheless, I'd like to suggest that we use the system in a different way: posts in the Map Section are automatically deleted 2 months after they've been posted, being any comment designated as a review kept no matter what. This way, the author can still receive bugs without having to check the website every day, and the valuable criticism is kept over the dozens of comments containing: «cool», «i like this map», and so on. It's annoying to see in the Map Section, but I know that, in other sections, especially Art-related ones, like Icons, this "spam" takes enormous dimensions, being rare the comment that's actually helpful.

This isn't entirely related to the issue initially brought up, which is why I'd like to change the title.

 

[Zombie]

Go ahead, but you could also create a separate topic for it.

Though, I'm more than certain a lot of issues were discussed here already that had nothing to do with the thing I brought up.

 

[Rui]

I've seen various issues mentioned, in this thread, relating general Map Section problems more than the reviewers in specific. Do you think I should create a new thread to discuss my idea? Because it's likely that people will end up discussing unrelated matters.
If not, I'd appreciate any feedback you can give on my idea.

~Thread renamed

 

[EagleMan]

I like the idea. In my threads on my map's website, usually people get distracted and start posting about other things, and it simply gets too annoying to have to constantly delete things just for the sake of cleanliness as I am also an administrator (meaning I know where you're coming from). So when I read the thread a few times over to go over the bugs, most of it is off topic.

People rarely give any actual criticisms to my map anymore, so it'd be nice to find the constructive criticism that much faster. Too much fanboyism (which of course doesn't feel bad) around my map to get decent, but relatively specific, criticism.

There's a question of details though.. I'm sure some uploaders would like to keep all comments, or adjust the timeframe.

 

[ap0calypse]

I like your idea, Rui.

The creators of a map must be able to select reviews as well though (only in their own map thread).
I know that's probably harder to do, but you earlier mentioned that moderators cannot be everywhere, and that is true.
If only moderators could appoint reviews, then other reviews (which go unnoticed by the moderators) could get lost as well.

 

[Boris_Spider]

I'm for the auto delete of non-review posts as well. I've gotten 80 some comments on my map's thread, and only 15 are reviews. The rest is usually bug reports (since no-one wants to post on the map development thread I made specifically for that) accompanied by the usual unhelpul comments like " awesome 5/5 +rep" or "it sucks" and a downrater that flamed the map because he got his ass kicked in a bugged version ( which was corrected the following day). The auto delete (after 2 weeks) would help deal with these posts without having to wait for staff to view reported posts.

I also support allowing mapper's to mod their map threads, similar to how they can mod their profile page comments. I assume mods can see deleted posts in their forum, so reported modder abuses can be dealt with accordingly.

//\\oo//\\

 

[-Kobas-]

After all this reading and exploring this thread I have 2 many things to say, but at same time, as well, I don't know how to start!

Oh this one was nice:

Not playing long enough is the fault of the map reviewer. If you're playing the map, you might as well do so until the end. Given that most maps are protected, whether or not you possess expertise on triggering and coding is irrelevant because, in the end, you didn't get to late game to know that there is lag.

Some maps don't need to be played until end because believe you or not some didn't even have one!
Each 20 map miss triggers for victory/defeat conditions, even more miss normal playable terrains and so on...
Also we can always check custom script (without de-protecting map or opening it in WE) and see if author used "memory cleaning functions"...

Example:
(1) Memory Leak

 [FONT=&quot]//===========================================================================[/FONT]
  (...)
  [FONT=&quot]function Trig_Day_Actions takes nothing returns nothing[/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]    call EnableTrigger(gg_trg_Day_Burn)[/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]    call EnableTrigger(gg_trg_Day_Burn_Effect)[/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]    call DisableTrigger(gg_trg_Destroy_Workers)[/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]    call TriggerExecute(gg_trg_Spawn_Workers)[/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]    // Spell[/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]    [COLOR=Red][I][U][B]call ForGroupBJ(GetUnitsInRectMatching(GetPlayableMapRect() , Condition(function Trig_Day_Func007001002)) , function Trig_Day_Func007A)[/B][/U][/I][/COLOR][/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]endfunction[/FONT]
  
  [FONT=&quot]//===========================================================================[/FONT]

(2) Cleaned Memory Leak

 [FONT=&quot]call TriggerSleepAction(10.00)[/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]    call QuestMessageBJ(GetPlayersAll() , bj_QUESTMESSAGE_ALWAYSHINT , "TRIGSTR_1329")[/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]  [COLOR=Lime]  [U][B]set bj_wantDestroyGroup = true[/B][/U][/COLOR][/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]    call ForGroupBJ(GetUnitsInRectMatching(GetPlayableMapRect() , Condition(function Trig_Initialization_Func110001002)) , function Trig_Initialization_Func110A)[/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]endfunction[/FONT]

This above is simple example, sorry for not professional words and shitz about it!

Rui I like you idea, but won't marking comments for moderators to check and set them reviews or whatever take even more time?
Also power to edit your submission is bad, because you will be able to delete bad reviews as well...

---

Also another important thing!

My first map was rejected, first comments that I get was "edit your damn poor description", first critics that I get was horrible!
But I wanted more, now my maps are approved, my comments don't even annoy users about descriptions they help them to make better ones, my reviews don't kill people, they bring large number of new ideas and hints what to do now, what to improve next!

We can't write simple code that will control people out there, sometimes spamming comments like, "Epic job dude, bring us more" give as strength to move on and continue our work, without any review in it! If map uploader really care he will read rules and act like any normal user, if he registered only to upload map that he found on epic war and then left THW or maybe so his friend can test it, I will be first one to reject it, and won't care about it!

 

[Boris_Spider]

Also power to edit your submission is bad, because you will be able to delete bad reviews as well...

We can't write simple code that will control people out there, sometimes spamming comments like, "Epic job dude, bring us more" give as strength to move on and contionue our work, without any review in it!

~A bad review is the reason for the user-mod power. If by 'bad' you mean a non 15/5 one, then that abuse would be a mod's job to deal with.

~I agree it's nice to see those posts, but the citical posts are the only helpful ones.

//\\oo//\\

 

[Vosty]

I like your idea, Rui.

The creators of a map must be able to select reviews as well though (only in their own map thread).
I know that's probably harder to do, but you earlier mentioned that moderators cannot be everywhere, and that is true.
If only moderators could appoint reviews, then other reviews (which go unnoticed by the moderators) could get lost as well.

Like Kobas said, this doesn't really work too well. When downloading maps, I usually read a few reviews just to know what I'm in for. (I find the actual descriptive ones.) While this feature allows a user to get rid of troll posts, it also allows them to "block" criticism, by deleting posts like "2/5 [insert reason why here]" I mean, if they know that they want help they won't abuse this, but the thing is we can't trust that everyone will do this. Unless you want to give a "power" to a user only if they request it, mods should be the judges of "this is unhelpful" and "this is really helpful"

But yes, of course all of this fails without mods. Which brings us back around...

 

[Dr Super Good]

If you want auto removing comments, you should probably have it that only the first 20 or 50 comments are visible (older get automatically deleted). Thus allowing slower maps to have good comment history yet hot maps like that D3 WC3 map do not end up with dozens of pages of comments.

The irony is one could probably right a leak detection script. Based on how many are spotted, the map could even have a leak warning. But such a script would take far too much work I imagine for just this.

 

[Eldubs]

I fully support zombie, as this issue is still seen in many so called reviews.

 

[Thfatman]

I realize I'm a little late to the party, but I feel I have some things that need to be said. If they've been said already, bleh, because I stopped reading the threads at about page 6 (Way too many posts...).

First off, having mods that strictly review trolls and spam takes a lot of time. I do that on the other site in which I am a mod, and it sucks. Most of the people don't listen if you tell them to play nice, and slap their wrist. At times, I just need to delete the selected post, and any flamming that came of it. Fun? Nah, don't think so. As was stated earlier, by Kwah (?) people will be asses. There's nothing you can do to stop it. It's like being in Trade in WoW, and you're looking for an enchanter, and some jack hole says," Your moms an enchanter." There's nothing you can do to stop that guy. Nuff said.

Second, I do, however, really agree with most of the points aforementioned in this thread. I've had this happen to me first hand. I made a campaign map, first map of the campaign, just to see how people liked it, and see if I would then continue the project (No use continuing if no one likes it, right?). All I did was get flamed because I had minor errors, and they said I put no time into the map (If they had read the description, I said I put about three weeks into it, which is a lot for me). Plus, a couple of the people said they didn't even try it, and didn't want to because of the name. Making your basis on whether to try a map based on the name is just retarded. I could see the description, because if it's something that doesn't interest you, then why try it. But the name? I've tried some maps that have seriously stupid names, but I still liked the map. In the end, I vowed to never upload a map here again, because of the community, and removed all mine uploaded.

Honestly, what I'm trying to say, yes, more regulation would be great, but would it really help? It's like leaving a kid near a cookie jar, with the instructions," Don't eat a cookie." He's going to do it, because you turn your back. Same with this. The kids will be good while you're watching, but a moment later, BAM, flaming another user. In order for this to really work, you need to weed out the trolls with punishments other than just negative rep (What the hell does that even do anyways?).

Again, sorry for the lengthy post, but I just had some stuff I wanted to say, and thought I should. Agree or disagree, it's up to you.

 

[Aeroblyctos]

Am I the only member against this "auto-delete-posts-after-a-while"? Just do things opposite as they are now: put the newest comments to the first page and the oldest comments to the last page. That way people can't be confused, but still they can read the history of the map and old reviews.

For me it's sometimes necessary to look old comments, if I forgot to put something down. Also it's nice to look where I started with a map and what kind of reviews I had when I first time uploaded a map and then look the newest reviews to see how am I improved and how I can still improve.

And besides, what does that solve anyway? Still we have a lot of maps in map section.

To Thfatman: What website you are using nowadays if you don't use Hive?