THW resources quality discussion

[Kazeon]

I have thought about this for a while.

I think THW should improve it's quality standart. Never approves garbages.

I have just looked around wc3c.net and realize how clean is that site. Full of quality and legendary resources. I don't mean that THW should be like that (only accepting high quality resources), but just improve a bit.

Why? So that people would have some pride for having their resources approved here

For me, as spell reviewer, I would increase my reviewing standart.

Perhaps Ralle would like to open new section for newbies? (not graveyard)

What do you think?

 

[takakenji]

no lol

 

[Deleted member 219079]

Well yea if they are to advance from wc3. Sc2 requires much more effort, they should prepare themselves for it by always giving their best in wc3.

But nah the quality standard is nice atm it's discouraging to raise it. Maybe if you want to find the very best, sort by rating or search for recommended resources.

 

[chobibo]

What's wrong with the graveyard?

 

[Vinz]

Just teach the new guys and give them suggestions/ideas to expand their spell to better quality and efficiency.

 

[-Grendel]

you make me feel bad. for uploading my garbage here.

 

[Boris_Spider]

I have thought about this for a while.

I think THW should improve it's quality standart. Never approves garbages.

I have just looked around wc3c.net and realize how clean is that site. Full of quality and legendary resources. I don't mean that THW should be like that (only accepting high quality resources), but just improve a bit.

Why? So that people would have some pride for having their resources approved here

For me, as spell reviewer, I would increase my reviewing standart.

Perhaps Ralle would like to open new section for newbies? (not graveyard)

What do you think?

1) You can already filter through moderator ratings (which comprises the high-quality resources).
2) How will you define 'garbage' or who will you have define it?
3) Opening a new section for newbies would force virtually the entire site into it. It would be simpler to create a good-ol-boy's club featuring the best modders.
4) So having people take pride in an arbitrary person's rating of their work is preferable to them taking pride in that many people found their work useful enough to use?

There's no reason to change the current set-up. If the high-quality search options aren't enough then create a new social group and invite everyone that you find worthy into it.

//\\oo//\\

 

[Kazeon]

thanks everyone for your feedbacks.

So everybody says "no"! good

 

[Nestharus]

JASS section is already like this. It's even more strict than wc3c .

Otherwise only look at DC for legendary resources.

Every resource i submitted to the Spells section got DC, shhh

 

[Deleted member 219079]

JASS section is already like this. It's even more strict than wc3c .

those who are brave enough to post in the jass section are brave enough to ask the school's hottest girl out D: seriously though, they've got some guts, critique in jass section is imo too nitpickng-like, maybe that's just me...

 

[Vengeancekael]

Ehhh, this issue's been brought up quite a few times.
Most people are against it since the moderator's job is to approve a properly working resource, etc. (especially in the maps section) - I mean, back when I was a moderator, I was also for higher standards in the maps section, but people rejected the idea and I think moderator ratings will also be gone in the new hive. (to be replaced by specific reviewers rating them or just based on user ratings, not sure)

 

[eubz]

If someone else work is worth approving, it shoul be approved. Hive standards are enough these days that warcraft 3 is becoming old and deteriorating. Its players are too few aside from bots even the legendary dota has now fewer players than in its peak days. Now, the new generation looks for games with higher resolutions or has better graphic qualities. We cannot deny that once war3 is well known but let us face the reality, warcraft 3 goes with its players and us, the hopeful modders and loyal to the game can just hope that the new breed today would come and love warcraft as we do.

 

[JesusHipster]

Hello people of THW.

I personaly think that moderation policy needs standarts. I am talking about models. Sometimes good and working models are thrown to :need fix: status because of a minor style flaw and at the same time we can see messy and overhaul crappy models get approved just because. This is wrong.
There also is a problem with rating system. -Grendel's models get too low amount of stars quet often in my opinion. It totaly needs examples of quality and rating that come regardless of an uploader.

 

[Vinz]

I think mods should be more generous with ratings. I see 3/5 on 90% of approvals.

 

[JesusHipster]

Or use the whole scale from 1 to 5

 

[Uncle Fester]

That's not a bad idea at all. I like the suggestion of making a section where newbies can upload their stuff. Now i even recognize the difference in my models, the difference between the first ones i ever made and the ones i created recently or create now.
The only problem IMO is that the gap between garbage and professional work is huge, with a lot in between. Sometimes it's difficult to say where the border of acceptance rly is, with so much in between. I am also afraid that even if the suggestion of the newbie-section is put into action, there will be a large grey-zone in the moderation of quality. I think if this idea should be put into action, there must be a clear and more precise definition of quality made, otherwise the Hive might end up having only a handfull of approved good work and tons of so-called "garbage".

 

[Rui]

Too tired right now for a large post, but the essence of wc3sear.ch — and then the Hive — was always that you could upload almost anything, except for utter garbage.

However, I too sometimes think ratings rarely match the real quality of the resource. I remember seeing plenty of good icons whose rating was just low compared to their real quality or usefulness, while others were overrated. I've been browsing the icon section out of sheer curiosity and I was amazed at the quality of some icons. However, our Director's Cut rating, in almost 10 years of modding, was given to a total of 13 icons — not to mention the criteria is not too apparent: I've seen icons whose quality surpasses a lot of the others currently with dc rating.

 

[Chaosy]

To be honest I think that the spell section is too harsh in terms of approval.

There are many fully working spells/systems that are put as needs fix even though they are MUI and leakless but might be optimal in some other aspect. Like not using a setup trigger perfectly. For Example not storing a special effect at init.

Fine give those spells 0 rating but they should be approved.

 

[Ralle]

For Hive 2, rejected resources will still be downloadable in a Graveyard. This will be a big problem at first because some rejected stuff must then be deleted for copyright/stealing reasons, but we have to take that at that time.

 

[Daffa]

Delete the copyrighted ones and leave the rest of junkies at GY.

The spells section actually has 4(6?) DC before Nestharus delete his Resources.

 

[JesusHipster]

http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/models-530/murk-snapper-255261/

http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/models-530/saddle-item-256167/

Judging by the rating these two models have the same quality.

 

[Rui]

Perhaps the separation between forum and resource moderators, conceptualized by Wolverabid, and which I disagreed with was perhaps the right way to go after all. I'm bringing this up because, the other day, I commented with someone that promoting a moderator for the resource sections requires him to hold the responsibility of being a comment moderator as well. We could separate this by having those moderators be just reviewers, perhaps?

On things as simple as icons, perhaps we could dismiss moderation altogether and just let user ratings decide the outcome of a resource's status.

 

[Deleted member 219079]

http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/models-530/murk-snapper-255261/

http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/models-530/saddle-item-256167/

Judging by the rating these two models have the same quality.

...we can't expect those with power to be perfect?

If we were to get near perfect, hive would need a goverment where 200 mods would vote on a poll whether to change your user title. But that'd be dumb wouldn't it?

So,,, we'll just stick to this method of moderating
...

= mods make mistakes, they're JUST humans.

Let's say a complete ape with 90 IQ got itself to the staff, so what? He wouldn't change the appearance of the staff ...

 

[Tank-Commander]

Quality of resources and their awarded ratings have always been in flux, to come to a more consistent state is difficult alone as a concept lest you have explicit "rules" for ratings (which to my knowledge most people aren't fond of, due to disagreements on what matters or not, amongst other things) All mods will have their independant viewpoint on what is impressive or not, and some mods may give different ratings depending on who the submitter is. (e.g. a resource getting a lower rating because the mod knows the submitter is capable of a higher quality)

The spell section (since it's the area I have the most experience in) from my perspective is very tempermental, there's a large list of resources I think undeserving of their ratings, and others I think deserving higher, however I'm inclined to point out that user ratings would not be any help either. I've found that people who give ratings on resources, rarely give the ratings they do on an informed basis, an example would be "unacceptable" level submissions getting 5/5 ratings based on appearences, a few examples of that can be found on the site. I also imagine quite a few of mine also have 5/5 ratings from users on this basis and not on programming merit.

Not as to say resources with 5/5 ratings based on appearence is "bad" or "wrong" but it does demonstrate the userbase's priorities.

There's also a history element to consider however with standards, considering the age of warcraft we have resources with high ratings, which would not get the same if uploaded today (potentially not even approved) - an obvious thing to say perhaps but regardless when it comes to comparing two resources of different times it's clear that they haven't been consistently rated, and thus the entire system becomes devalued, re-evaluation of resources would be "nice" but far too impractical to implement.

My thoughts of ratings for a long time have been thus: a perfect system doesn't exist, the best you can hope for is a mod giving good justification for the given rating, and if you disagree then make your own list of good resources

High standards tend to be demoralising for those not currently up to them, low standards make those capable of much greater things feel devalued

Spoiler

and I'll forever consider the spell section ratings a bit of a joke as long as that roflcopter has DC

 

[Deleted member 219079]

and I'll forever consider the spell section ratings a bit of a joke as long as that roflcopter has DC

that was obviously a mistake by the judge

 

[eubz]

Quality means moderators' mind and style.

 

[Uncle Fester]

However, I too sometimes think ratings rarely match the real quality of the resource. I remember seeing plenty of good icons whose rating was just low compared to their real quality or usefulness, while others were overrated. I've been browsing the icon section out of sheer curiosity and I was amazed at the quality of some icons. However, our Director's Cut rating, in almost 10 years of modding, was given to a total of 13 icons — not to mention the criteria is not too apparent: I've seen icons whose quality surpasses a lot of the others currently with dc rating.

That's coz ratings are often more sympathy votes than real ratings and also coz many mods (especially a few from the mod section of this year) are rather subjective than objective, unfortunately with approvals/rejections too.
I had opened a thread about a similar problem long ago. It deals mainly with moderation, but applies to ratings as well.

 

[Nestharus]

As Ralle put it best, he wants subjective ratings. He wants a cool factor, and as long as there is a cool factor and it's not based solely off of quality, the ratings will always be subjective, lol. You can upload a perfect and brilliant resource, but because it's not "cool," it may only get a 3/5.

You'd have to convince Ralle to change policy =)


Art can certainly be graded using a set of defined metrics based on what the artist was trying to achieve. How well did they achieve their goal?

Programming resources can definitely be graded effectively, as well as spells. From an HCI standpoint to a design standpoint, etc. MEDA can be used. MEDA can also be used on maps.


This stuff isn't be used though, so we get what we get ^_^.


I only made DC on everything I uploaded because I uploaded some really awesome/amazing stuff, like File I/O, Network, and major save/load libraries. Kinda historic stuff =p. DDS was also a major step forward. Those huge step forwards earned the cool factor. Trigger is also a huge step forward, but I don't know if it'd earn a cool factor rating from the current moderators. It is very complex, intelligently done, and designed beautifully =). That alone is not enough.

 

[Zombie]

I like garbage. Some resources are not of excellent quality standards, but their usefulness compensates their lack of quality.

 

[General Frank]

Keep in mind that in a perfect community things such as ratings would not be needed.
If something is broken then it has time to get fixed, that's what moderation is there for as well as enforcing the rules. Nothing more nothing less.
If everybody would work for the community to thrive and get better, everyone would benefit from it. Why do we need to measure and compare something to something else anyway?

 

[TriggerHappy]

I think we need lower standards (ripped models etc..).

lol.

 

[Kazeon]

For spell section, I can only suggest to nominate some high quality resources to be DC ed. It's a non-sense for a section with more than 1500 submissions and there are only two DC ed one (currently)? Whereas I have seen some wonderful submissions in terms of performance. And who needs totally perfect coding anyway? Even leakful GUI maps can be played normaly for hours.

BPower's meat hook is one awesome spell I have seen lately. It's far more than enough to get DC award imo. And how about The_Witcher's camera system? It is the most downloaded coded-resource so far and got 5/5 from 33 users? What else do you want?
My head contains a big list of them. But just too lazy to write them all.

I'm just thinking, is it that impossible for human-coder like me and the others to achieve DC? Or are they must be a godlike-coder like Nestharus or Bribe who can achieve it? c'mon

And why should we DC things? So that people know that THW got some cool spells. Nuff said

 

[Uncle Fester]

As Ralle put it best, he wants subjective ratings. He wants a cool factor, and as long as there is a cool factor and it's not based solely off of quality, the ratings will always be subjective, lol. You can upload a perfect and brilliant resource, but because it's not "cool," it may only get a 3/5.

You'd have to convince Ralle to change policy =)

IMO, a subjective rating is by far not the best. I think an objective rating would be better, especially for increasing the Hive's quality.
Little example:
A model with absolutely no flaws gets moved to "Needs fix" just coz the mod, who in fact is only 1 person, didn't like the color of the cloak or the skin it uses.
Meanwhile, the same mod "overlooks" a few minor flaws from another model and approves it, just coz he/she likes its style, but in fact it lacks a bit in quality.

You see what i mean? Subjective ratings leave a huge grey zone. This aside, why should the approval be depending from the individual taste of one or a few people only? I think mods should only be able to reject models for quality issues and not for matters of taste.
Additionally, for improving the Hive's quality, i guess it would be also necessary to prohibit experimental changes, that are ordered by a few mods for approving a model. This makes the model fit only an individual taste again, and besides, who is going to use the model mainly? I doubt it is going to be the mod.

I like garbage. Some resources are not of excellent quality standards, but their usefulness compensates their lack of quality.

Yeah, but IMO this comes only true if it only lacks a little bit in quality. If a model has serious problems, like having a hand clip completely through the leg, than i don't think that its usefullness compensates this @ all.

I think we need lower standards (ripped models etc..).

lol.

My worry with this idea is that the Hive won't have a quality and originality afterall, if this is left passing. Allowing ripped models will open the doors to any kind of garbage. My oppionion is, as said above, that we mainly need a change/update in the rules. This will also increase quality, quite certainly. If resource makers get a fairer rating for their stuff, they will certainly become more eager to invest more time and effort into their work and hence the results will be better. Trust me, no one is going to try to make a perfect model if he/she isn't certain wether it's going to be approved or to the trashcan.

Keep in mind that in a perfect community things such as ratings would not be needed.
If something is broken then it has time to get fixed, that's what moderation is there for as well as enforcing the rules. Nothing more nothing less.
If everybody would work for the community to thrive and get better, everyone would benefit from it. Why do we need to measure and compare something to something else anyway?

Truly. That's how it should be, but unfortunately it ain't so @ all. Absolutely, but from the point on where people get a bump just coz someone else has a different oppinion, they won't see the point why they should invest so much into the community.
I agree with you in that.

For spell section, I can only suggest to nominate some high quality resources to be DC ed. It's a non-sense for a section with more than 1500 submissions and there are only two DC ed one (currently)? Whereas I have seen some wonderful submissions in terms of performance. And who needs totally perfect coding anyway? Even leakful GUI maps can be played normaly for hours.

BPower's meat hook is one awesome spell I have seen lately. It's far more than enough to get DC award imo. And how about The_Witcher's camera system? It is the most downloaded coded-resource so far and got 5/5 from 33 users? What else do you want?
My head contains a big list of them. But just too lazy to write them all.

I'm just thinking, is it that impossible for human-coder like me and the others to achieve DC? Or are they must be a godlike-coder like Nestharus or Bribe who can achieve it? c'mon

And why should we DC things? So that people know that THW got some cool spells. Nuff said

That's what i am speaking about: sympathy votes and subjectivity! Both are neither fair nor helpful in increasing the Hive's quality. As of now, i mainly think that our moderation system rather punishes those who try, instead encouraging them and awarding those who do something astonishing. I can't say about maps, spells and coding, but what Dalvengyr said, sounds very familiar to me.


In conclusion, i am wondering how the Hive's quality should become better if individual things count more than the main thing.

 

[Kazeon]

And how about displaying moderator's rating instead of user's rating in the resource list? User rating are rather very subjective more than objective: more friends more ratings. Geez, I hate it.

 

[Chaosy]

And how about displaying moderator's rating instead of user's rating in the resource list? User rating are rather very subjective more than objective: more friends more ratings. Geez, I hate it.

Yes please. Sort by mod rating.

 

[Uncle Fester]

And how about displaying moderator's rating instead of user's rating in the resource list? User rating are rather very subjective more than objective: more friends more ratings. Geez, I hate it.

IMO, the mod ratings and even the approval of a resource, especially models, seem to me recently much more subjective than the user ratings. Many models get a good rating from a user who is not a friend of the modeler. This aside, if the rating should be fair, it should ONLY BE OBJECTIVE. How can a rating be fair, if it's allowed to be influenced from personal taste?

Yes please. Sort by mod rating.

As said above, for getting a fair rating in this case, it must rather be objective.

Or how about changing the rating and approval system into this:
- Approval/rejection of a model must be considered in an objective way (overall quality, no flaws like clipping, usefulness, filesize etc.).
- Personal matters of taste from the mod are not allowed to influence the approval/rejection of a model.
- Mods are not allowed to "order" people to make experimental changes (example: "maybe use or try using the anims from this model")
- For rejection, the valid reasons must be stated; such reasons MUST be stated precisely. Example phrases like "something about its right arm's movement seems a bit odd. Fix it" should also be banned. Just "something is odd" on its own is not a valid reason, IMO.
- "Feelings" should be kept outside of the approval/rejection moderation (example: "I still feel that the ******** needs a little more work").
- Delete user rating, but instead, if subjectivity is rly this necessary, make 2 mod ratings: one objective (which will be only about the overall quality of the model) and a mod's subjective rating (his/her personal oppinion/standing to the model).
- Both ratings should be given by at least 2, preferrably more mods, i.e. each mod can rate the resource both objectively and subjectively.

 

[Kazeon]

What I mean with subjective is their rate are determined by the user, not the resource xD

Anyway, moderating is not an easy job, and it's impossible to remove the "subjective" thingy from it. Because moderation itself is based on moderator's personal opinion about the resource, perhaps user's comments have influences but not that much. I like moderator's rating more than user's, because basically they know better than most users. But I don't know about modeling section since I have no any footprint there.

 

[Uncle Fester]

What I mean with subjective is their rate are determined by the user, not the resource xD

Anyway, moderating is not an easy job, and it's impossible to remove the "subjective" thingy from it. Because moderation itself is based on moderator's personal opinion about the resource, perhaps user's comments have influences but not that much. I like moderator's rating more than user's, because basically they know better than most users. But I don't know about modeling section since I have no any footprint there.

Yeah. That too.
I know. A personal oppinion is a good and nice thing to have, but IMO it should not influence the approval of a resource. I rly don't see the reason, why the approval or rejection should be depending from personal taste, as long as the quality is O.K. I also believe that no one of the Hive's resource creators is happy to see his/her work getting rejected just becoz it doesn't fit into someone else's personal taste. This way, most people are discouraged from trying to make good stuff (as it takes more time and work), if they see that their efforts were for nothing just coz someone else has a different oppinion. It's just common logic: "Why should i bother myself more, if the mod might give it a rejection coz it doesn't fit his/her taste?" And for the menace named experimental changes, why doesn't the mod make this change himself/herself first, for seeing how it is, rather than forcing the resource's author to make it? For me, telling someone else to make an experimental change (just coz "it might (only)" be better", or no approval comes rather close to extortion than to moderation.

Furthermore, why should the approval be depending on the personal taste of a person that more than likely isn't going to use the resource anyways?
And also, we have an originality rule. From the point on where someone is forced to make a change in the way someone else desires, the resource is not anymore 100% his/her invention.

 

[eubz]

You are right uncle. I am also displeased with this PERSONAL TASTE you are talking about. For me, as long as the resourse met the rules it has to be approved not with this kind of self whatever. Modders would likely lost his will if this thing persists.

 

[Kazeon]

Yeah. That too.
I know. A personal oppinion is a good and nice thing to have, but IMO it should not influence the approval of a resource. I rly don't see the reason, why the approval or rejection should be depending from personal taste, as long as the quality is O.K. I also believe that no one of the Hive's resource creators is happy to see his/her work getting rejected just becoz it doesn't fit into someone else's personal taste. This way, most people are discouraged from trying to make good stuff (as it takes more time and work), if they see that their efforts were for nothing just coz someone else has a different oppinion. It's just common logic: "Why should i bother myself more, if the mod might give it a rejection coz it doesn't fit his/her taste?" And for the menace named experimental changes, why doesn't the mod make this change himself/herself first, for seeing how it is, rather than forcing the resource's author to make it? For me, telling someone else to make an experimental change (just coz "it might (only)" be better", or no approval comes rather close to extortion than to moderation.

Furthermore, why should the approval be depending on the personal taste of a person that more than likely isn't going to use the resource anyways?
And also, we have an originality rule. From the point on where someone is forced to make a change in the way someone else desires, the resource is not anymore 100% his/her invention.

I think we were talking about different thing. I was talking about rating, but you were talking about approval. My bad >.>

Yes, for approval, I totally agree with your opinion. Also originality should not influence approvability. Because we can't find something original all the time

 

[Uncle Fester]

You are right uncle. I am also displeased with this PERSONAL TASTE you are talking about. For me, as long as the resourse met the rules it has to be approved not with this kind of self whatever. Modders would likely lost his will if this thing persists.

You're right about the way it should be approved: as long as the rules and quality are met, it should be approved!
This personal taste is one of the reasons why i am not anymore this active on the Hive and in making models. Nearly each model that i made recently had to be changed at least two times for getting an approval, and 90% of these requested changes were matters of taste, not technical flaws or real quality issues.
As of now, it rather seems to me that a few moderators misuse their position for "forcing" everybody to make his/her stuff meet more their needs and desires rather than giving it a fair moderation.

I think we were talking about different thing. I was talking about rating, but you were talking about approval. My bad >.>

Yes, for approval, I totally agree with your opinion. Also originality should not influence approvability. Because we can't find something original all the time

It's not that different, and also the thread is named "......quality discussion".

The reason why i implented the current approval travesty is coz it somehow goes hand-in-hand. "Why bother to make HQ and perfect stuff when it's going to be thrown away anyways coz of a personal standing of a few people?".
That too. It's hard to always invent something new or something that hasn't been made so far.



The heck, why is -Grendel not a mod anymore?? I rly miss his moderations. He decided approvability in terms of quality and functionality of a model and implented his own personal standing as a seperate sentence and in the rating. If he pointed something out, than it always was a real issue, like an arm clipping through a leg or a vertex assigned to the wrong bone, but he never disapproved of something just becoz he didn't like its style @ all or coz he would like to see how it looks after an experimental change.

 

[JesusHipster]

^this is true

 

[Footman16]

Why upset the equilibrium, this problem would be... difficult to solve, so I say maintain the status quo, it "works" and has kept the site going so there.

 

[Uncle Fester]

Why upset the equilibrium, this problem would be... difficult to solve, so I say maintain the status quo, it "works" and has kept the site going so there.

All of the reasons i see are posted above. It's your good right to be against a change, as it's our good right to protest against a judgement that's unfair in our eyes.

I don't want to convince you to change your oppinion, but i am asking, did you never experience any of these extortion-alike forced changes or matters of taste (like: i don't rly like your resource, so it will be rejected)?

 

[Boris_Spider]

I don't want to convince you to change your oppinion, but i am asking, did you never experience any of these extortion-alike forced changes or matters of taste (like: i don't rly like your resource, so it will be rejected)?

That's the reason why I stopped uploading the icons I made for my maps & abilities. The mods at the time wanted something more in tune with their style (cartoonish) while I was merely saving other people the trouble of ripping the icons from my map if they found them useful (the map is open source). The functionality of the icon in game was never in question. The mods have a 0-5 rating to state their approval of the style...

Crabby_Spider basically left THW because of that. Of course, he moved to DA and has done pretty well there with emoticons.

//\\oo//\\

 

[Uncle Fester]

That's the reason why I stopped uploading the icons I made for my maps & abilities. The mods at the time wanted something more in tune with their style (cartoonish) while I was merely saving other people the trouble of ripping the icons from my map if they found them useful (the map is open source). The functionality of the icon in game was never in question. The mods have a 0-5 rating to state their approval of the style...

Crabby_Spider basically left THW because of that. Of course, he moved to DA and has done pretty well there with emoticons.

//\\oo//\\

This is also the reason why i don't rly want to upload anything else in the near future. OmG! This sickness even reached the map-uploads.....i rly don't understand why they should be rejected when the map/campaing that uses them gets approved. What's the logic behind? If you wanted though, you could still make your icons easily available to the public by uploading them in your Pastebin.
Yeah, this is what i am mainly referring too. Functionality should make the approval and the rating the matters of taste, NOT the opposite.

I didn't know that with Crabby_Spider (i don't even know this user ), but i guess more people might soon follow, if it remains this way.

 

[Vinz]

Should moderation be abolished?

I once thought the problem was rather little.

 

[Boris_Spider]

This is also the reason why i don't rly want to upload anything else in the near future. OmG! This sickness even reached the map-uploads.....i rly don't understand why they should be rejected when the map/campaing that uses them gets approved. What's the logic behind? If you wanted though, you could still make your icons easily available to the public by uploading them in your Pastebin.
Yeah, this is what i am mainly referring too. Functionality should make the approval and the rating the matters of taste, NOT the opposite.

I didn't know that with Crabby_Spider (i don't even know this user ), but i guess more people might soon follow, if it remains this way.

I'd only ever seen it in the icon section, but to be fair I've never done models/skins/spells. The only problem the map section has had in my time is under-moderation (has since been remedied) where hundred of maps were never looked at.

As for leaving, most of the modders for this game are in their twenties now - they're leaving regardless of the social dramas that will play out here.

Should moderation be abolished?

I once thought the problem was rather little.

I don't see why it should be abolished - it's meant to verify that a resource is functional. The problems start when the mods want you to upload their versions instead of yours.

I get the impression that many of the problem mods were removed several years ago - I've heard of a big "cleaning-house" (I was inactive, sick of dealing with them).
@Uncle, I don't really see this problem currently; have you tried uploading any models recently?

//\\0o//\\

 

[Ralle]

That's the reason why I stopped uploading the icons I made for my maps & abilities. The mods at the time wanted something more in tune with their style (cartoonish) while I was merely saving other people the trouble of ripping the icons from my map if they found them useful (the map is open source). The functionality of the icon in game was never in question. The mods have a 0-5 rating to state their approval of the style...

Crabby_Spider basically left THW because of that. Of course, he moved to DA and has done pretty well there with emoticons.

//\\oo//\\

I don't believe icon moderators ask you to make the icons in a special style. If the icon is well made, it will be approved.

 

[Boris_Spider]

I don't believe icon moderators ask you to make the icons in a special style. If the icon is well made, it will be approved.

Hopefully they don't now (I haven't been around there for a while), but they did.. You're right that they don't explicitly demand a particular style - but if you don't make it in a style that they liked you would have many problems & it wasn't worth the headache. However, the plagiarism accusations were taken as compliments.

The problem is with the "Well made" criteria applied to the icon. So long as it has enabled/disabled for basic icons, passive enabled/disabled is present for passives, the upgrade format is present for the upgrade-related icons, and the score-screen icon is present for heroes in game, and the sizing is right, the icon is functional ingame. Instead comments like "It's too fuzzy" or "you should pronounce that one shape and maybe change the color to make it look better" were encountered, or "are you sure you did this?". This is a game modding site, not art class. The suggestions can be helpful but should not be a requirement. If a modder likes it he can use it - unless the mods reject / needs-fix it which leaves it invisible to those you may have use for it. This site is a resource archive; resource archive =/= digital art studio.

I'm pretty sure the mods I dealt with are long gone now (I won't be bothered to check). I can link you to the battle I fought, but it was Crabby_Spider who really went rounds with the mods. I'd advise to leave the matter as it is though - we've moved on & the icon section is still around.

//\\oo//\\