Roland
R
Roland
Silly to know that when someone complains here in this thread for his resources or other resources are pending so as the moderators/staff take action on approving resources.
Reviews aren't mandatory, for maps at least. A review is simply added if the map moderator is willing to do so, and the usual factors of making a decision for that is if the map mod has enough time and how many other maps that should be attended to soon. A full review from us is usually a nice balance of feedback and a critique is put in place for anyone to read, but many times there's not enough time for that. We have the freedom to it via the ways you listed.teozamiat said:I would be interested in what the purpose of the written part of the review is.
Is it mainly so that the author of the resource can get feedback? Because in some cases, from my limited knowledge which is nowhere near enough for me to throw a general rule out there, it would seem that the author of that resource is contacted by the moderator separately via PM with what to change about the map in order to get an approve (it was the case with me).
Is the written review meant to serve potential downloaders, so that they can get the confirmation from a staff member that a map (I am mainly speaking about maps here, though this can be applied to most resources) is worth downloading? Because if that is the case, many reviews are lacking in enough substance to be of any help in figuring out if that map is any good. If a simple approval is needed, why not just keep the star rating without any written comments?
Absolutely. It's like leaving a list of useful notes outside the door of something that needs to be inspected.Knight of Asford said:Hmm...from what I've read...are you saying that if we *users* test maps and give them reviews, then we'd be able to help the moderators a bunch in approving the map? Oh well.
What are you guys going to do with the map section? As people have noticed there are over 5 pages of pending maps (80+ maps) and that's a lot. Even with 3 reviewers still doesn't help much.
I do think it's a reasonable topic if there are issues within a resource section, but it seems
more of temporary concern than a general "Ask The Staff" question, and would fit better here.
I might have misinterpreted the intention of course, and you primaly didn't want to lay out it as a critique.
because we all have real lives
You should never assume this on the internet.
OT:
The map section had between 1-2 pages most of the time when the section had three mods. Now it has 1 mod (+SCN) and 3 reviewers, so provided that they don't slack it should be solved in time.
Once again I would like to raise the question why newer uploaded models gets moderated before older ones that have been pending for months.
A model uploaded yesterday (March 22) has been moderated and approved/declined today. Yet I still see pending models all the way back a page 14.
I would like to note that this has nothing to do with my own models. It's purely a principal matter.
If there is time for new models to be moderated there should be time for the old ones as well.
I thought this had been addressed in some staff thread.
Edit:
Whoops. Let me change that to page 66. (2013)
It is the exception to the rule Solu9. Generally models are moderated from oldest to newest, but if a moderator/reviewer stumbles on a model they really like, they think would be really easy to moderate or they've had access to before they were uploaded, they're given to moderate those too.
....
Em!s models was removed and has just recently been restored by his own request and are under Ralles responsibility. Also, if you actually took the time to read, those models are all moderated and awaits changes before they can be approved. The newest unmoderated resource is Mike's Storage (from this year). And that one I'll probably moderate, as soon as he gets to the models I already moderated, if nobody else does that is.
Hm.
So because newer models have been more fun to moderate we still have a model on page 66 pending from 2013?
If the rule is, from oldest to newest, that model should, in any case, have been moderated by now. No matter how much fun or easy newer models have been to moderate.
That model alone raises the question if the rule is actually being upheld by just a fraction, and if it is actually the other way around; newest/more fun models gets moderated first.
I think I fail to see how models that far back can still be pending. Because even I, as a mere member of this site, can check currently pending models and when they were uploaded. So can the moderators.
For already moderated resource, it is up to the moderator to take care of those things. Since MiniMage no longer moderates models, someone else should probably take care of that model if it haven't been updated yet. And yeah, somebody need to get around to the Nerubian Ziggurat. Might take care of it myself one of the coming days if nothing else.
Thank god Minimage stepped aside, he was never really that good of a moderator.
Actually, leaving a model as pending has a couple advantages.
1. It allows people to comment on the resource, encourage the creator.
2. It allows people to point out flaws.
3. It allows people to suggest ideas.
4. It gives the moderator time to think, to be able to later give a just judgement.
5. It gives the moderator time to properly test the models ingame, stress test them and ensure that nothing breaks.
6. Leaving a few pending for a longer time allows the moderator to feel less pressure, ensuring just judgement and a good mood, also increasing the chances of a far more detailed review of the resource.
Also, four pages of pending isn't really a whole lot. You really need to account for their life.
I just have one thing, doesn't really fit anywhere else but I figured I'd ask here since it's looked at by staffers.
A map I made has an "approved" tag with no rating and no review by ap0calypse (2009).
That rating was absolutely fitting for the map in the past state but I worked on it again and improved it by 813%.
If I simply don't do anything about it, will it be rewiewed one sunny day?
Just curious - I don't need it reviewed anytime soon...
I just have one thing, doesn't really fit anywhere else but I figured I'd ask here since it's looked at by staffers.
A map I made has an "approved" tag with no rating and no review by ap0calypse (2009).
That rating was absolutely fitting for the map in the past state but I worked on it again and improved it by 813%.
If I simply don't do anything about it, will it be rewiewed one sunny day?
Just curious - I don't need it reviewed anytime soon...
No. I am not comparing them to anyone specifically.You're basically complaining that they aren't as fast as I was before. How is that fair? When I was at the fastest and multiple pages were moderated as soon as they popped up, I was unemployed. I needed something to distract myself for a bit and the hive was perfect. I then landed myself a job for a couple months and naturally my speed slowed. It was a job that was fun and made me feel meaningful, but also was time based.
Essentially I got no life. And I know I am not the only one.At this point in time you're basically complaining that they are productive members of society with lives. Of course they got shit to deal with. Pain to deal with. Life is pain, anyone who says anything different is selling something. It's not a generalization to assume that they are busy hardworking people, because anyone who respects themselves aspires to be that.
They put in time and effort. However, you have no right to demand how much time and effort they need to put in. Months of slack? What do you mean by slack? Since when is the average speed of my moderation some kind of reference, some kind of deadline or quota? I ask you this again, why do you feel so entitled? What possible event triggered your thought process to work this way?
It doesn't make sense. As you said. They are moderating models on a fan site. Since when did their rate of moderation have any greater impact? Since when were a deadline imposed on them and why do you assume you have the right to do so?
I just have one thing, doesn't really fit anywhere else but I figured I'd ask here since it's looked at by staffers.
A map I made has an "approved" tag with no rating and no review by ap0calypse (2009).
That rating was absolutely fitting for the map in the past state but I worked on it again and improved it by 813%.
If I simply don't do anything about it, will it be rewiewed one sunny day?
Just curious - I don't need it reviewed anytime soon...
I am just trying to highlight that BS reasons given to defend the mods from the claims that some models takes much longer to get reviewed.
Possibly, there's billions of people on this planet. But statistically they are a minority. Here on the hive the amount is even less on a percentage level. Now, I'm not making any assumptions regarding their busy lives as I generally know what everyone there is doing. Some work, some study, but nevertheless they are busy. They lead busy lives. That's not an assumption, that is fact.Essentially I got no life. And I know I am not the only one.
Again, I can't help that you're a little dense, but I'll repeat it as many times as I need to until it sticks. Their life takes priority, things get done, not quickly, but they get done. Thus there is no issue. It's not a question about "blame". Stop trying to make it one. Use your time to get your life in order or start modding, don't use it to whine. It benefits no one. "Blaming whatever reason gets jack shit done." your words. Go get shit done. Don't complain about others doing something slowly. At least they are doing something. Shit is getting done.It does not mater how their lives look, the fact remains. Blaming whatever reason gets jack shit done.
Life is unfair, get used to it. As previously explained, we don't give a damn when the model is uploaded. I should probably explain my methodology that appears to be farily shared among the other moderators, except maybe for Misha, but again I never did come to understand that guy. Below is a numbering, from 1 to 5, 1 being the highest priroity.I am saying they moderate unfairly in the sense of newer stuff gets moderated faster than some of the older ones.
Well, your reasons for whining is to me, rather stupid. You have no life so you spent the extra time you got over to complain to the ones who do that they don't spend all that extra energy and motivation on things they don't have time for. Many people may be in a similar position as you, but they don't shout it off rooftops. They don't use the growing frustration of feeling bad to complain about things that only annoys and distracts.If something triggered me it's the fact that you (plural) try to defend the mods with, according to me, stupid reasons.
That undoubtedly is stupid. Stop doing stupid things. Stop arguing that they are bad just because you have more time and different reasonings to do the same thing. They spend as much time with the hive as they wish. They moderate in a pace they set themselves. You have absolutely no reason to complain. Thus, stop complaining, book a time with a shrink. Pour out your issues and don't drag other people down because you feel bad.I would do the same simply because I felt like it.
It allows the moderator to bring their magnifying glass and analyze the model in model editors to spot potential flaws that may come up.
Well, your reasons for whining is to me, rather stupid. You have no life... etc etc
Isn't it a sign for the opposite ?Overfilled peding section is just a sign of a lowering interest towards wc3 modmaking. Testing out a model isn't hard, especialy if you have a special testmap for it. In this case the testing can be done under 10 minutes or something.
Agreed.The toxicity level of this thread has risen dramatically.
I think he was referring to the ones who moderate resources not the people who upload resources.Isn't it a sign for the opposite ?
Since overfilled Pending sections mean many resource submitters and people who are interested in wc3 modding, doesn't it ?
One should not underestimate that ( theoretically) 10 minutes, in no section.
It stacks up fast.
The toxicity level of this thread has risen dramatically.
Oh I see, thank you.I think he was referring to the ones who moderate resources not the people who upload resources.
Sidenote: this is just rude. I don't think that ex-member of administration should behave like this.
I completely agree, this is not the first time he crossed the boundaries.
The toxicity level of this thread has risen dramatically.
Once more, I am not complaining about there being three pages of models, maps or spells. I am saying they moderate unfairly in the sense of newer stuff gets moderated faster than some of the older ones.
well i mean the purpose of reviewers was to legitimize reviews from trusted users, in a sense. i've also seen mods cite a user review, particularly in the maps section. but how often do you see user reviews, and how often do you see one that's 'complete and more or less objective'? i don't think this is a solution.I think that one way out of this situation is legitimizing a user-made review thing, but with lesser bureaucracy than now. In order to become a model\map\spell\etc reviewer one needs to undergo a series of tests, right? That sounds cool and is certanly a must-have. But what if someone writes a complete and more or less objective review in the comment section? Should mod review the model himself? Of cource. But the answer is not necessarily positive in times of emergency.
Why do think that being able to ban people is a bonus? It's not like we can take the hammer for live target practice or use it to to our own end. And it's not like I love removing people from the site or tidying up the shit they leave behind. I do it because I want the forums to better off than a cesspool.I think that in cases when the moderating is done completely voluntarily(in a sence that it's not rewarded in any way) one can't blame the mod for a long waiting time. But that's not true in cases when the model mod has a right to ban people or other things like that. It means that responsibility comes with a neat reward-bonus of power and then the moderator should be mocked for a badly done job by the community. I don't whether anyone of the current mods has any sort of power\else reward though.
They can definitely refer to the review if they agree with it. We don't require people to reinvent the wheel when they don't need to. AFAIK references have been included in reviews several times.I think that one way out of this situation is legitimizing a user-made review thing, but with lesser bureaucracy than now. In order to become a model\map\spell\etc reviewer one needs to undergo a series of tests, right? That sounds cool and is certanly a must-have. But what if someone writes a complete and more or less objective review in the comment section? Should mod review the model himself? Of cource. But the answer is not necessarily positive in times of emergency.
That sounds exactly like what the reviewer position is already in place for. We're definitely open to add more people to it, and are looking into it daily.I think that during a crisis (and the overwhelming amounf of pending resources is certanly a form of crisis) accepting user reviews just for the sake of time saving and reducing the pending period can do the trick. Of cource, any review won't do. If the review comes from someone experienced who bothered to check all the stuff and wrote about it in his comment his or her comment should be accepted as a review.