Due to all respect... i dont think that the raitings of all maps are fair. Let's take the map "Invasion" we were discussing. You criticized the terrain - although you obviously dont know how to make a good terrain (i've played a lot of your maps and some of them could not even compare with the given example). But that's an other topic... But after all: This map has been improved with ver1.03A and me and my friends who are not... uhm what was the english word for "genügsam"?... frugal! And they said "oh man that'll be a lot of fun at our next LAN-Party!"
And maps like "Hell TD DemonBlaze 3.0" with no new idea, bad balancing, boring tower system AND abusive content, are approved? Come on, you can't be serious!
So much for the "fair rating"...
We the staff give critique of what's is good and what is wrong with the resources, it doesn't mean that we need to be better than the person just to get the right to critique their map.
Infact, some map mod/admin and ex-mod/admin doesn't have any experience in map making at all.
Does it mean a movie critique must be a good actor just to critique the actor performance in a movies?
And being approved doesn't mean anything, if a user report it. We would reject the resources, provided a good reason been given. What do you think? You think a resources approved, stay approve forever? Even the staff resources would be rejected if it was really bad.
And we have hundred of map over there, we cannot just spend 3-4 hours to review a single map. That is why we do a shallow approving by making a quick inspection over it, this shallow inspection was also part of orders by the webmaster itself.
That is why there is some bad apple out there. Do you think reviewing resources is a piece of cake? Try review The Chosen One campaign by Aeroblyctos or Castle vs Castle Flame Edition by Flame_Phoenix, you would not finish review it in 7 hours if you have the intention to give a full review.
Some user either request for another review or constantly breaking the rules with multiple upload or delete and re-upload resources, making our job much harder to be done. Instead of saying the staff is bad, awful and doesn't do the job properly. Why not try to ease our burden by helping us give a constructive critism about a map just like bounty hunter2 does?
Every staff have their own way to rate resources, some rate it due to gameplay while the other rate it due to the storyline or the uniqueness it have.
Do remember we staff doesn't get paid of what we did, what we did is for the good of this community as well. We doesn't get anything at all and guess what we usually get most of the time? Disrespect, flame, abuse and many thing else you won't imagine. If you think I am wrong in this part, tell me 1 good reason what benefict a staff could get by doing all this sort of thing.
If you think you are far more efficient than every map moderator/admin and capable to give a fair rating and full detail, I would be glad to request Ralle or Rui to give you a position as mod. But, do remember that there is not less than 5 map being submitted to hive per day. So, reviewing 1-3 map per day won't be enough to clear up the pending pages as some map could took not less than 3 hour to be review if you want to give a full detail about it.
You do not really believe that, don't you? In the evening after work i dont want to read map descriptions! People want to browse the map list and their first look is at the rating! And AFTER THAT they may read the description. (i never do that because i know what a TD map is about, for example...) Some people just want to find a good map. And they need to find it quick! At every LAN-Party we are having the same problem - you cant find good maps here because a lot of maps got no rating. And people dont wanna waste time by reading all those way too wordy descriptions...
I really ask myself why i'm doing that... in the end you won't change your mind even if we were right...
@Zelda.Alex:
Thank you for beeing one of the few who understand the problem here. I was wondering if i was really that wrong...
There you go, when we make out review and rating neutral. You complain about it and yet you whine when we give a rating that seem to be unfair?
Come on, make up your mind.
I dont understand whats going on here... There are users who are making a suggestion and all they get as an answer is "no! your idea is bad, everything is fine, **** you, i'm right". That cant be! C'mon i'm 25, i've managed a lot of software projects and this thread is no "blabla i want you to do it my way"-nonsense. We only wanted this to be a constructive thread with an idea that cant be that wrong... I'm afraid your motivation is just neglecting old-established things...
What we are talking about has got a cause and dont think people suggest changing the mentioned function just for fun!
Ralle would accept any suggestion as long as it really does give benefict. Not every suggestion would be accepted. I have provide lot's of suggestion and only 1-2 of it have been approve such as post review, rate later and Review Status map.
What makes you think there is nothing been done? We need to discuss this with other staff because them might disagree about it due to the negative impact it could have from what the suggestion does.
I agree with Oklino that the auto-thread-closing function , should be disabled for the ressource section. Many old threads when auto closed cannot be given comments or rating to the old threads if they are closed. the threads closed on the author's request are exception, of course.
Back to topic.
If thread closed at the request of the author or staff would stay lock doesn't get affected, then I am all agree about it. Else, it wasn't a good idea.
