Should one moderator opinion be definitive?

[deepstrasz]

For instance when it's about a map. Some mods or reviewers seem to be harsh especially on the melee genre. Shouldn't there be a place for bad rated maps and highly rated ones? Why should a map be perfect or fully symmetrical to appease to the melee style?

What do you think?

 

[Chaosy]

Shouldn't there be a place for bad rated maps and highly rated ones?

No.
Fuck bad submissions and everything and everyone associated with it.

Why should a map be perfect or fully symmetrical to appease to the melee style?

There may lie some truth here, 'copying' too much of a genre makes it very uncreative and it should not be required to fill such 'standards'.

 

[blancfaye7]

Why should a map be perfect or fully symmetrical to appease to the melee style?

Because that's how a melee map should be actually. Trust me, I've even had some issues with official Blizzard's melee map. There are cases where one area can be faster because of town hall's range to gold mine and the formation of trees.

For example, some maps makes peasants walk slow on a gold mine because they are "NEARER", (even with just a slight difference), to the gold mine.

 

[deepstrasz]

Fuck bad submissions and everything and everyone associated with it.

I don't mean bad like not worth playing. I mean like, out of the ordinary. For instance, I don't see it a must that a melee map must be heavily symmetrical or have the same creeps near every player. Stuff like that.

Because that's how a melee map should be actually.

Not every melee map should be a ladder type map.

 

[Strajder]

The thing is, it all depends on the whim of the person in position to approve or disapprove maps. I don't see the purpose of rating if only the maps passing moderator's personal taste check are allowed to be public.

How it should work is that really only offensive maps, for example promoting IRL hate or controversial topics, or really bad maps, for example consisting only of starting location and not much else, shouldn't be approved. (And provide flagging feature so the users themselves can suggest which maps are below standard.) Anything below that severity threshold should simply be a matter of rating.

 

[deepstrasz]

Is this whole topic a thing anymore since we have the have the Substandard Section
anyway? You can download most rejected stuff now anyway.

True, we have it. Do those maps remain or are they automatically deleted after some time?

 

[Strajder]

IMHO disapproved maps shouldn't be separated from approved. Since rating is a thing here, users could just sort by that field and decide whether they should download a map or not based on the rating. Having a separate place for "disapproved" maps just artificially takes them away from users who might not be aware of the existence of that folder/subforum/whatever or are just lazy to check it out.

 

[Chaosy]

No offense, but they should stay seperated

Trashed + Incinerated + deleted*

 

[Strajder]

No offense, but they should stay seperated, user votings aren't always honest. Actually, they tend
to be a lie.

No offense, but what is its purpose then? The present system makes the approval process highly subjective. I have seen many bad maps which are approved, while good maps are not being approved.

Trashed + Incinerated + deleted*

Edgy.

 

[Chaosy]

User ratings are always higher than the mod rating, I don't think I've ever seen the opposite happen.

I've seems users post "5/5 amazing icon!" comments on icons that I consider 3/5 at best, which makes me wonder how much rep the creator bribed them with.

 

[deepstrasz]

I've seems users post "5/5 amazing icon!" comments on icons that I consider 3/5 at best, which makes me wonder how much rep the creator bribed them with.

Now, you're just being childish. When you consider something somehow, it doesn't mean you're necessarily right about it. On the long run, 75% is taste. And, yes, I've seen map moderators rate a map higher than it would deserve from an objective point of view but that is not a problem since users also have a say and moreover the map was working properly.

 

[Chaosy]

When it comes to icons there is only 64x64 pixels to judge, there is not a lot that can make an opinion differ that much.

Even on larger images where ther's a bit more to judge, it's impossible to have a huge difference.

Here is a random picture from google:

The one who gives this 1/10 got mental problems, end of story.
I'd say 99.99% would rate this between 6-10

 

[PurgeandFire]

Feel free to dispute a mod review. You can make a post in staff contact.

We tend to judge based on existing rules and how we've judged things in the past. In your case, if making a map asymmetrical was a design decision then it can be overlooked (as long it is still balanced).

 

[Rui]

For instance when it's about a map. Some mods or reviewers seem to be harsh especially on the melee genre. Shouldn't there be a place for bad rated maps and highly rated ones? Why should a map be perfect or fully symmetrical to appease to the melee style?

What do you think?

So this question pertains specifically to the melee genre? When I read the title it seemed general. In answer to Should one moderator opinion be definitive?, the answer to that is no. As a matter of fact, no one's opinion should be definitive/absolute. Experience in years of Hive has demonstrated that it always ends badly.

As for the melee genre. I have authored melee maps and I can attest to have rarely ever appeased the staff in charge with some originality. Still, melee is supposed to be close to ladder maps, hence my high ratings for @R.Gaming_Strike's maps.

If you're trying to do something which doesn't follow the melee rules, then you should be categorizing your map as Altered Melee. The miscategorization was frequent. Having taken a quick glance, it seems that issue has again gone untackled.

The Hiveworkshop has - and should continue to have - high standards for a resource.
If there wouldn't be such standards, Hive would become the next Epic War - filled with crap.

Yes.
It is healthy to reconsider your decisions, but whether to keep or abolish mods/reviewers is a discussion we've had multiple times. It always ends with: the Hive keeps its standards, despite the lack of moderators.

(The lack of mods was always an argument in favor of abolishing the moderation system, but, apparently, there are enough people for it and the reviewer position I had proposed so long ago)

I have seen many bad resources get a 5/5 just for no apparent reason, same also goes for
good resources getting a 1/5 for no apparent reason.

This is also something moderators are supposed to tend to. I did, at least.

 

[deepstrasz]

So this question pertains specifically to the melee genre? When I read the title it seemed general.

No. I just pointed out that the melee maps are harsher reviewed.

If you're trying to do something which doesn't follow the melee rules, then you should be categorizing your map as Altered Melee. The miscategorization was frequent. Having taken a quick glance, it seems that issue has again been untackled.

Altered melee could be that type of map that changes its melee status in the editor from melee to non-melee. But here, I've seen it as one that is drastically changed, like with custom models or triggers that go beyond the melee range.

 

[Strajder]

When it comes to icons there is only 64x64 pixels to judge, there is not a lot that can make an opinion differ that much.

Even on larger images where ther's a bit more to judge, it's impossible to have a huge difference.

Here is a random picture from google:
[...]
The one who gives this 1/10 got mental problems, end of story.
I'd say 99.99% would rate this between 6-10

A lot can happen in those 64x64 pixels ([number of colors in colorspace]^4096 different possibilities, to be precise). A critic could rate the picture you linked with a 1-5/10, saying it is an uninspired clipart.

 

[Chaosy]

Good thing critics are among those 0.01% then

 

[Rui]

So this question pertains specifically to the melee genre? When I read the title it seemed general.

No. I just pointed out that the melee maps are harsher reviewed.

Continuing on the topic entitling this thread — as a map moderator, when I tested maps, I'd always try to find a group of people to play them with me. After that, I'd cast my own user vote according to my opinion, but the moderator vote would be the average of the testing crew's votes (including my own user vote), all equally weighted. That felt to me like the best policy, but finding a team wasn't always easy then, let alone 5 to 7 years afterwards.

 

[Strajder]

Good thing critics are among those 0.01% then

You can't draw conclusions in advance, without actual data. Results can also vary based on the sample population.

 

[Chaosy]

Oh please.
The average user on the hive is like what 15? I doubt they are professional art critics.

 

[Strajder]

Oh please.
The average user on the hive is like what 15? I doubt they are professional art critics.

Are you talking based on actual data? And how can you know the data on user age is trustworthy?

 

[Chaosy]

You can't prove that they are critics either.

So that's devil's proof.

And since we can't prove either being true, we can't but guess. And my view on the hive seems pretty more likely than it being filled with professional critics in disguise.

 

[Chaosy]

That was not my point.
I was just saying the hive is not filled with professional critics from Hollywood.

 

[deepstrasz]

I was just saying the hive is not filled with professional critics from Hollywood.

There you have it folks. Hollywood the best place in the world for marketing. I'm sorry if that's your best example of people to do professional work.
Oh, and that's also a good thing, what you wrote.

 

[Chaosy]

*sigh*
Does the location mater? I am almost certain you get the message.

 

[Strajder]

There you have it folks. Hollywood the best place in the world for marketing. I'm sorry if that's your best example of people to do professional work.
Oh, and that's also a good thing, what you wrote.

*art

"Hollywood > Paris, Rome..."

 

[Celaquil]

To be clear:

No, as Rui said: No person's opinion is definitive, it's the logic behind the opinion that is (if at all) definitive.
And, as Purgeandfire said: Everyone who submits a resource on this site that feels their resource has been
wrongfully moderated are free to post a complaint about it in the Staff Contact forum. Where the case will
be taken seriously, and there will be brought in at least one second moderator to re-evaluate the moderation.

For the deviated topic: The current separation between approved and rejected resources will stay, as has been
pointed out, neither user-ratings nor moderator-ratings are 100% foolproof, they are there to help, but they do
not serve as a gauge for what is and what isn't a quality resource.

If you think this is wrong, and that there shouldn't be a separation, please make a separate thread about it and
continue the debate there. Bring forth good arguments and we will listen, but ultimately we, the staff, decide.

Also, stop being foolish, this isn't OT and it certainly isn't SE.