The trash map uploading problem

[-Peper-]

Greetings.
So far, have seen so many trash maps out there.
(If you don't know trash maps, see those)
Trash 1 Trash 2 Trash 3 Trash 4
People that will upload that 'trash' maps make account only for uploading that 'trash'.
Why i'm so negative about uploading Trash map?
Because i remember a mod said "Don't upload improved version of your map again, use update button. Why? Because even the resource deleted, it don't mean deleted completely."
So uploading Trash Maps is Wasting Space Memory of Hive!
Because All Trash-map uploader NEVER read the rules, even they are negrepped, banned, they can make MANY more accounts (except IP ban, they are HiveSaver ).
So, any solutions there to prevent trash maps uploading?
Sorry for everyone offenced, i don't meant to be Offence.

 

[Zealon]

Well this issue isn't anything new, the moderators are slightly more strict when it comes to maps, and they punnish trash uploaders accordingly. Of course there is nothing you can really do to stop people from uploading trash; too many rules and restrictions will also affect the lawful people who don't upload trash.

Yeah it does get a little annoying, especialy to those of us that do obey THW rules, and make decent maps.

 

[-Peper-]

I agree, however there is anything we can't do?
We don't like Hive's space being wasted.
And this.

Yeah it does get a little annoying, especialy to those of us that do obey THW rules, and make decent maps

I agree too.

 

[Darkzealot_128]

I agree with you because about 1/10 of maps being uploaded lately are approval worthy but the rest are just junk, in fact, I was just about to make a thread like this because of all the trash lately. Most of the descriptions are just like 'I r stolen tis map giv me credit fo sweet map' and the people who upload them don't listen to the rules and still repeatedly spam their maps. We're gonna have to stick the rules in their faces to make them listen if the trash-map uploaders will keep wasting our space.

 

[-Peper-]

Agreed

 

[Ironside]

Actually, no, IP ban doesn't do anything. Lets assume the guy knows a little about VPNs, then IP ban doesn't do anything. And if he has dynamic IP then he can change it at any time and come back.

A solution would be, that the maps would really get deleted, not just marked as deleted...

 

[-Peper-]

You mean, really REMOVED.
Haha, yes. IP ban does nothing....

 

[Ironside]

Yeah, that's what I mean.

 

[Cihparg]

As everyone knows Banning the user is useless; But banning and literally removing the map, is useful.
Actually, adding just some keywords which then would be banned could help in this situation.

 

[Zeron]

if a map is rated by the mod or universally understood as below par. and far enough below that its beneficial in no way to anyone including the up loader then it should be deleted. in the rating system there should be an up below "0" to rank as deletable or not needed or "unworthy". it would conserve quite a lot of space since like you said maybe 9/10 maps 6/10 (conservatively) doesn't meet any requirements to be useful by anyone. however mod should have final approval of PERMANENTLY deleted or just labeled as such.

 

[Zealon]

And its not such a big deal if trash gets permanently, I mean its not like anyones gonna miss it. Also, the trash-uploader will always have a copy of the map somwhere, and can re-upload it when improved. And map reviewers will probably have the map somewhere too. So I agree with the fully-delete-the-trash idea.

 

[Zeron]

but should be that easy like votable or like a mod just has decision anyways. though if a mod gonna permanently delete not many is gonna vote for it to stay i assume.
it does seem though that theres a thread about this same topic every couple of weeks

 

[Ironside]

Please don't double post. Use the edit button

 

[-Peper-]

it does seem though that theres a thread about this same topic every couple of weeks

Where exactly?

 

[Zeron]

Oh im sorry i got confused and commented to early. just goin through the map uploading section and seeing all the comments and conversations about the topic i geuss not many actually threads have been posted. but non the less you cant say the quantity of terrible or unsuccessful map uploading to the hive isn't a well talked about or breached subject. though i know i have been a apart of some threads sometime of the subject they haven't been recently since ive only been active for 2 weeks now.

 

[GhostThruster]

They could put a rep and post limit, so you need to be active and trustworthy(so like minimum 10 rep and 50 posts).

 

[Darkzealot_128]

I don't agree about the amount of posts (I just don't think it should work that way but maybe it could be 10-20 posts minimum), although I do agree about the amount of rep. In some cases though if it is a quality resource and the person doesn't have the rep (or posts) he/she could contact a moderator and if the moderator believes it's quality it goes into the map section. This might also be able to be applied to the spell section because the amount of trash spells is increasing (because it's either object editor work or too simple).

 

[Icedrake]

Maybe have all maps be looked at by a mod before being allowed to be uploaded to Hive (just for brand new maps, not ones that have already been looked at and allowed)?

 

[Zealon]

But that might be a little biased. For example, if the mod has an issue with a certain user; he might never allow that user to upload any maps, just because the mod dosn't like him/her.

Or the mod dosn't like a specific type of gameplay, he might just delete the map for that reason. Or if the mod cannot be bothered with checking the map, or if the mod has had a bad day, he'll just delete the map.

I agree with needing a certain amout of rep to upload the map though, it might be a good way to stop the 'trash' from entering our database.

(800th post ^^)

 

[GhostThruster]

Mods won't do that. IF they do, Ralle will sack 'em and remove their power, same as in the real world; an employee rips off customers, customers complain, employer kicks out employee.

 

[Zealon]

You have a point, but I still don't like the idea of leaving the pre-map-reviewing to one person. I think the rep/post count requirement idea is better.

 

[GhostThruster]

Tbh, I don't really give a shit. The guys at the Hive take Wc3 too seriously, but I guess that is what THW is for.

 

[Icedrake]

I wasn't really thinking that they should give a full review, just check the map to see if it breaks any rules before allowing it. Then we won't get any messed up maps like the porn one we had a few days ago.

 

[-Peper-]

umm, that Sex?! rpg?

 

[GhostThruster]

Yeah, I saw that one too. Got rejected like right away.

 

[Zealon]

I HATE things like that, I say that anyone who uploads, or gives links to porn; should be banned forever, and make their porned resorce be permently deleted.

 

[GhostThruster]

Funny thing is, kids at the age of making Wc3 maps (at a low standard) shouldn't even have access.

 

[Ralle]

I assume that all the maps you talk about are maps in the "pending" category.

How about now showing pending maps in the main list? Or make the front maps page show things similar to a forum so it shows something like this:

- Approved Maps (4786)
Here you will find all the approved maps.
- Pending Maps
And stuff.
- Rejected Maps
Yeah..

 

[Zealon]

Its a good idea Chief but......how will that stop stuff like porn?

 

[GhostThruster]

Can't we just use a filter for that? The forum section thing, in my opinion, isn't that necessary, and I don't think there should be a section for Rejected maps.

 

[-Peper-]

Section for Rejected map? Funny.
In my opinion, we don't need rejected map section. They can just appear in pending as "Rejected".

 

[Darkzealot_128]

I disagree -Peper-, because the rejected map is still there and it is no use hiding it because that is a waste of the Hive's memory. We might as well. But if we get things like pornography, we could always hide that.

Another thing (in some cases) is that some people really try hard on their maps but they get rejected anyway. If people would be able to update their rejected resources in the resource section while they deserve approval, then the map can have a review while it is in the rejected section and a moderator could always approve that map if it starts to get good feedback. Everybody would like to have a second chance with their map since you can't multi-upload.

 

[Boris_Spider]

I'm against the rep/post-count requirement for uploading maps.

It already exists in an unofficial manner in the Icon section. Crabby_Spider had to jump through a rediculous number of loops just to get the icons reviewed. None of them had anything to do with the art but rather whether of not he is actually capable of making the icons he uploaded. (This was back in January) it led to both of us going inactive for 8-9 months. I only came back because I'm working on a map and need feedback.

If your stipulation on rep/posts existed, I'd only have 2 options:
1) Find another site
2) Spam posts/rep-whore until I satisfied the requirements

The map mods won't be able to keep up with the individual review requests.

//\\oo//\\

 

[Darkzealot_128]

It probably won't need to be applied to 2D art, JASS, or 3D art.

 

[Linaze]

Make a newly created account take 24 hours before activation.
Require 72 hours of account age before the user can upload stuff.
If the problem are new accounts that is. If not, I have no idea.