questioning the need for 'substandard' model status

[Misha]

well.. how should i put it in the best way possible.. I admit that i'm not the best person to talk about it, and might even have a rather bad bias against 'substandard' tag, but.. do we really need it these days? .u.

I feel that there really should be a default 'pending' status, 'it needs fixing' status, for those that do need it, and a 'working resource' status, or just 'working'

well let me know what you think, folks, and.. please don't poke the staff to decide to poke me back. oO I have been a troublemaker a few.. or more times..

 

[Deleted member 219079]

Pending, passing and failing get my vote, because they all connotate volatility. 'Working' strikes as naive. Maybe the community just hasn't spotted the issues yet? Similarly, explicitly saying 'needs fixing' hints that the absence of this label signifies no need for fixing, which might not be the case.

 

[Shar Dundred]

I see no problem with the term substandard, I think it is a better description and gives a better insight what to expect than "working".
No reason to get into linguistics about this, in my opinion.

 

[Misha]

the thing is, setting it to substandard, immediately implies that something is wrong with it, even if the model is working properly, and is only being 'nothing special'. I thoroughly test my models and i always give them all they could need. They should not be hidden behind a second section, in my opinion..

 

[Deleted member 219079]

No reason to get into linguistics about this, in my opinion.

I will further my claim. 'Working' is susceptible to outright lying to the community about the state of given resource (e.g. uncaught errors). And 'requires fixing' is potentially misleading for a term that simply states "doesn't satisfy all our criteria", i.e. is subjective (e.g. no description, yet fully functional asset). Now this is no longer about connotations, but I'm claiming the words are outright problematic. 'Passing' would say "passing all tests community has given it thus far" and 'failing' the opposite.

 

[The_Silent]

A lot of the resource in sub-standard is there because it does not work. So I would suggest another name than "working", unless people are to scour the entire sub-standard section, so it can be separated into "working" and "not working" categories.

 

[Chaosy]

I feel like the substandard section is too vague.

I'll be the first to admit that I loved the idea initially, but what I dislike is that there are actually some neat hidden gems in the substandard section.
Underneath a pile of rubble of other horrible submissions.

Let's say 50/100 is approved
My submission gets 49/100
It gets put in substandard with 1/100 submissions
These do not belong together.
We are basically mixing "Almost/Kinda usable" with "Garbage"

In my opinion substandard should be in the 40-50 range, crap submissions should just be rejected.

 

[Scias]

I don't think there's a issue with naming of the sections nor their structure.. However I do think there's some inconsistent moderation, there seems to be a issue in determining approval of some resources depending on how fitting they are with the artistic standard of the website and their usefulness as a resource.

Sometimes I get confused if The Hive is an artistic gallery first or a resource website first. Usefulness of certain resources tends to get overlooked based on it's artistic "quality" - I put the word quality in quotations because it's usually determined by moderators personal preference.

 

[Sieben]

I agree that substandard is too vague. Resources may be labeled as substandard for various reasons, and it should be more clear so users are aware of what they actually download. How can I know a model is broken or just not original enough?

 

[deepstrasz]

I guess functionality and utility should be solved with a tag since Substandard would be unfair?

 

[Misha]

not sure.. but just a tag 'useful' on a normal approved model might be neater than 'substandard', indicating just that.. 'its nothing special, but there you go' and it won't be hidden in a separate section, which is what i have most of the vex with..

and as for whether hive is for useful or artistic models, then perhaps another tag, 'artistic' should be in order.. up for moderators to decide on a case by case basis. or the community.

as for legions of current 'substandard' models, well they won't be re-checked themselves if there's a change. I personally would auto-reward the people who test with a single point of rep for each model ticked ' useful' or 'artistic', if that still has any meaning

but meh.. i should not be making plans..

 

[deepstrasz]

or artistic

More like user made, since rips from Blizzard games are allowed and are useful (and of course artistic).

as for legions of current 'substandard' models, well they won't be re-checked themselves if there's a change. I personally would auto-reward the people who test with a single point of rep for each model ticked ' useful' or 'artistic', if that still has any meaning

There was an initiative: Substandard/Too Simple Models [The Culling]
But for that proper people like model makers etc. are required.

 

[Misha]

More like user made, since rips from Blizzard games are allowed and are useful (and of course artistic).

this is kinda just discussing an alternate name of models crafted with care, versus the just useful and working ones..

There was an initiative: Substandard/Too Simple Models [The Culling]
But for that proper people like model makers etc. are required.

initiative, yes, but was it a demand? I imagine really making a point, encouraging testing of models that are in this section, by anyone who wants to do it and is honest about it.

 

[stein123]

A few weeks ago there was a "discussion" between Minimage and Ujimasa, kinda related with this topic: Archer (Gryphon Mount) and Derivatives

 

[Misha]

I kinda like people who 'churn out' variations of models, and i don't see a mass of useful models as 'flooding' >.> people who set everything up should be commended for effort..

as for further comments of minimage there.. I'm wondering if there should be automated content filtering, excluding people on a personal list?
because one can't please everyone

 

[General Frank]

We definitely need a category for substandard. There are resource that simply either do not work just are flat out not good enough, but do work.
I admit that is a grey area.

How about we shift some some substandard stuff to approved and most approved stuff to something like 'premium'. That way everyone is happy, but none is the wiser.
Bad idea. Why? Because some people would think so high of their resources and would not see that they are actual garbage and nothing special about them or would try everything to sneak their way into that so called premium category. No, that's not a wise idea.

Or we could simply bunch everything together and just separate them into 'approved' and 'rejected' with the addition of TOTALLY REMOVING any rating system besides the download counter on those resources?
May websites, including our fellow friends at wc3c and xgm do similar things already.
People would complain, but who gives a damn about some weaboo rating on a website anyway, right? This is a community after all and not someone else's personal playground and indulgence of self-loving blindness.

But you said it yourself pretty damn well: You cannot please everyone. Which in return means that not everyone is up to snuff for any system at hand. There were, are and will always be whiney people that have nothing else to do than complain about ANY sytem, even if they proposed that system and did not find it suiting for their personal needs and gains in the end. If you don't like the cards your are being dealt, then why playing the game in first place?

 

[Misha]

I do not agree.. I believe people should have their place without the section that undermines their effort..
thus, once again, we need content filtering

 

[General Frank]

I do not agree.. I believe people should have their place without the section that undermines their effort..
thus, once again, we need content filtering

Please elaborate your filtering method. I really would like to know what you have in mind.

 

[Misha]

Please elaborate your filtering method. I really would like to know what you have in mind.

content auto-filtered by name of the uploader, with checkboxes for; models, textures, spells, and whichever other resource one does not want to come across. I have been used to it clearing away many translation mods on the nexus sites, for an example

so.. whichever checkbox is ticked, said resources will not come up in search or browse. if all the boxes are ticked.. well, it is self-explanatory at this point.

 

[Ralle]

Substandard means below standard. It does not mean wrong, broken, crappy. It just means below our standard.

Substandard was introduced because a lot of useful things went unused because they were rejected/restricted. If we were to remove substandard today, all contents of it would go into restricted.

The reason for this somewhat complex system is that 1. we want to present as much useful stuff as we can to modders while 2. artists should aim for the stars when making things. We want artists to aim for approval. I have talked to many that would feel like making high quality stuff would be less rewarding if their creations were deemed equals with simple geomerges and things people can whip out in an hour.

So far I am pretty happy with this system as it seems to unite both groups of people in a state of harmony.

 

[Misha]

Substandard means below standard. It does not mean wrong, broken, crappy. It just means below our standard.

Substandard was introduced because a lot of useful things went unused because they were rejected/restricted. If we were to remove substandard today, all contents of it would go into restricted.

The reason for this somewhat complex system is that 1. we want to present as much useful stuff as we can to modders while 2. artists should aim for the stars when making things. We want artists to aim for approval. I have talked to many that would feel like making high quality stuff would be less rewarding if their creations were deemed equals with simple geomerges and things people can whip out in an hour.

So far I am pretty happy with this system as it seems to unite both groups of people in a state of harmony.

I have always been for quality, and will probably continue to create quality stuff, i'm just against having a scratch-made model, with all required animations, just placed out of people's view just because its a little too simple.
perhaps a simple rename of the section to 'useful' would be neater? along with a little different description of the status, that does not force an assumption that every model is flawed or not working..?

 

[Scias]

I have always been for quality, and will probably continue to create quality stuff, i'm just against having a scratch-made model, with all required animations, just placed out of people's view just because its a little too simple.
perhaps a simple rename of the section to 'useful' would be neater? along with a little different description of the status, that does not force an assumption that every model is flawed or not working..?

To me it doesn't sound like a issue with the structure of the website at all, but just a issue with moderation..
A example of a simple model like you explained that was Approved and not set to substandard: Simple Sword
It even says "Simple" in the name, and that's how I found it.. Searched for simple in models section..

 

[stein123]

It even says "Simple" in the name, and that's how I found it.. Searched for simple in models section..

X'D that was before the bundle option was implemented :c, the knife, and the simple club, were meant as attachments for -Supa's goblin model

 

[deepstrasz]

The reason for this somewhat complex system is that 1. we want to present as much useful stuff as we can to modders while 2. artists should aim for the stars when making things. We want artists to aim for approval. I have talked to many that would feel like making high quality stuff would be less rewarding if their creations were deemed equals with simple geomerges and things people can whip out in an hour.

Well, sadly, icons from other Blizzard games are approved and the effort on them is not even as much as those simple geomerges.

I have always been for quality, and will probably continue to create quality stuff, i'm just against having a scratch-made model, with all required animations, just placed out of people's view just because its a little too simple.
perhaps a simple rename of the section to 'useful' would be neater? along with a little different description of the status, that does not force an assumption that every model is flawed or not working..?

What's not working should be in Awaiting Update or Rejected anyway, don't you agree?

To me it doesn't sound like a issue with the structure of the website at all, but just a issue with moderation..
A example of a simple model like you explained that was Approved and not set to substandard: Simple Sword
It even says "Simple" in the name, and that's how I found it.. Searched for simple in models section..

Sure... but most weapons are pretty much simple compared to whole body models (which also might include a weapon or more).

 

[Scias]

Sure... but most weapons are pretty much simple compared to whole body models (which also might include a weapon or more).

You can find models just like it that are substandard, here's a example: VileBlade
Somehow this one isn't gonna be useful and there wasn't enough effort for it while the other one is.. I see why because of @stein123's reply, but can't all of these be used as attachments for the Goblin?

 

[Misha]

well i have just a few things that i don't like about substandard section;

its name, the status description, the way it shows as something vague instead of another thumbs up, and the way it doesn't auto-appear while browsing resources

so.. here are my suggestions @Ralle

section name: 'Useful'
description: 'This model might not be to hive's standards, but its working and useful.' (do expand it if it needs more)
used icon: (for both user resource page and status) a lightly greener or more orange thumbs-up.
browse and search: well.. i don't know how auto-including the useful section needs to work, but having a checkbox to untick to exclude the useful section would be cool.. Ouo

Is any of this possible?

 

[Sieben]

I agree with Misha. The word 'substandard' may be misleading in some cases. The descriptions says: 'This bundle is marked as substandard. It may contain bugs, not perform optimally or otherwise be in violation of the submission rules.'.
But there is no way to distinguish a model that is too simple and a model that is half-broken. In my opinion, the term 'substandard' should apply to models that are not original enough, too simple, while bugged models should be labelled as 'Awaiting update'. In that case, it would be nice no have those substandard bundles displayed when browsing resources (with a checkbox to deactivate that feature, to give users the option - I know it's already possible, but one must use the advanced search page).
That way, browsing resources would be easier and users wouldn't miss useful however low quality models, as long as the distinction is still clear.

 

[Ralle]

But useful overlaps with approved. And stuff can be substandard without being useable.

 

[Sieben]

And stuff can be substandard without being useable.

This is precisely the point. Useful and useless stuff may be found in substandard category, which is confusing. There should be a clear distinction between usable substandard resources and broken substandard resources, imho.

 

[Misha]

shouldn't broken stuff go back to the 'needs fix' section anyway?

 

[Scias]

The reason for this somewhat complex system is that 1. we want to present as much useful stuff as we can to modders while 2. artists should aim for the stars when making things. We want artists to aim for approval. I have talked to many that would feel like making high quality stuff would be less rewarding if their creations were deemed equals with simple geomerges and things people can whip out in an hour.

I think a solution to the problem of borderline approvable resources and rewarding the artists for quality work would be by adding Featured tag and possibly spotlight for such creations.

Like mentioned previously by Chaosy, there are some gems in substandard section that are currently "hidden" from modders, which should instead be proudly presented by the website like all the rest since they are both creative and useful creations. Some scratch made models that are good quality but just too simple (ie. attachments) do deserve to be displayed since they can be useful for certain modders.

Also like deepstrasz mentioned blizzard icons from other games being approved while simple geomerges aren't, I think some of the simple geomerges even though can be whipped out quickly can be really useful and creative as can be seen in most Ujimasa Hojo's work, and I don't think it's a good idea to have them hidden in substandard since just by looking at the amount of downloads they have you can tell how useful they are as resources.
Besides simple geomerges are the most fitting resources when you're looking to create a blizz-like map and trying to follow the exact style of the original game (which to me seems like a goal of a lot of modders) in this case seeking the most useful resources this website has to offer for their projects would somehow be in the substandard section..

I would add Featured tag and spotlight for featured models to reward the artists quality work and give them something to aim for better than just approval, featuring their works would be a nice way to give exposure to talented artists and their creations. This would also separate the top notch quality work and simple geomerges or simply made scratch models while having both approved as useful resources.

Here's a mockup of the idea I have in mind:

Spoiler

 

[Misha]

hm.. now you make me conflicted.. I want a permanent change to the 'substandard' section and its properties, in a way that Ralle doesn't have to mess with the issue for too long.. but on the other side.. a return of featured models? maybe even director's cut?