User Moderated Maps

[PurplePoot]

We've implemented a new map moderation system--users can vote on map approval or disapproval (sort of like the old Minimod system), but enough votes in one direction will actually cause the resource to be approved or rejected respectively. A moderator's decision will override this, but likely will not need to.

Currently, a resource needs at least 10 votes to be approved and 20 to be rejected, and 75% of the votes to be in favour of one side for the resource to be approved or rejected respectively. These numbers are semi-random and subject to change as we see the system in action.

Please post questions, comments, and concerns about the system here.

 

[dansaDisco]

awesome. Let's hope that it works, too.

 

[Just_Spectating]

of course what if a noob multi accounts to get his map approved

 

[PurplePoot]

of course what if a noob multi accounts to get his map approved

Then they will be banned and the map will be deleted. There is a log of who voted and what they voted for, as well as an option for users to report a map (the !).

 

[Vengeancekael]

Thats very nice,but it says "Press the report button etc." maybe place that one right next to the 2 thumbs?

 

[PurplePoot]

That's what the big "!" is.

 

[Vosty]

Not a bad idea.
Maybe a bit bigger number, but this will definetly make the map approval get higher.
Hopefully our standards won't drop below Epicwar.

 

[aaron]

this would help get rid of the spam if it would auto remove rejected maps.

 

[Hawkwing]

For some reason, I feel that if you're going to have "Yes" and "No" appear when you hover over the images, there should be some sort of question like "Should this resource be approved?", since you can't exactly answer a statement. That, or change Yes and No to "Vote for Approval" and "Vote for Rejection."

 

[TheHunterKiller]

This sounds pretty useful, i hope it will work.

 

[Wraithling]

Sounds promising, but only time will tell whether it will work as successfully as planned. Worth a trial period at the very least.

 

[Just_Spectating]

its probably not going to be successful

most people wouldn't answer the question and most maps will probably stay pending with like 6 votes on one side, 17 votes on the other

 

[Linaze]

We'll see how it works... we'll see.

 

[Pyritie]

its probably not going to be successful

most people wouldn't answer the question and most maps will probably stay pending with like 6 votes on one side, 17 votes on the other

Which is why we said we'll see how this works out

 

[Linaze]

Yeah well, if this totally fails, it won't be that hard to return to the old system.

 

[ragingspeedhorn]

Good initiative, hopefully it'll work out for the best.

 

[Anti_Bodies]

I really like the layout of this whole system, it looks really nice.

EDIT: oh and i will be using it.

 

[Zack1996]

Nice. Let's hope this helps with the huge amount of pending maps.

So what's going to happen to the Mini-Mod system?
Also, will there still be reviews and stuff? It would really help the mapper.

 

[Linaze]

The old "mini-mod" system is gone now, obviously, seeing how the different buttons you used to vote for either approval or rejection now serve a different purpose. As for reviews, of course they will still exist, a moderator review weights more than any amount of users.

 

[Septimus]

so if the map violate map submission rules with invalid author name, we can report it?

 

[Linaze]

If the map breaks a rule as minor as lacking a proper description or so, I personally would prefer you send me a PM with a link to the map, but for more extreme cases, such as porn maps, racist maps (etc.), you should report it.

 

[wereguy2]

Oh god...
While this is an alright idea, I think that it will not work out, as most people have far lower standards than moderators.
I personally hope that this will be removed soon

 

[PurplePoot]

I personally hope that people will not make conjectures of how this will or will not work until we see how it will or will not work. I think the user base has at least a decent idea of what qualifies a good map as they are the ones playing the maps, but we'll see.

 

[Anti_Bodies]

Should rep carry weight of some sort? Or maybe some sort of rep/post ratio? Or perhaps maybe we should stay clear of using rep anything more then for pretty gems.

However as wereguy2 said, i notice a vastly lower standard amongst users opposed to moderators. But im very willing to give this a shot.


Chippin in my other 2 cents:
--==Idea==--
once a map has atleast 5-10 passing votes, and is a minimum of 2/5 rating amongst users (with 3-10 votes), then it will be deemed worthy of being reviewed by a moderator. When it is deemed worth reviewing by an official moderator, a notice is attached to it saying that this map has reviewing priority (or something like this). This way map moderators spend much more time reviewing worthy maps, while the community takes care of the noobier maps.

Another + to this system is that it gives people time to update their map from lacking to quality (if needed). I am aware only quality maps are supposed to be uploaded, but obviously noobs with 4 posts don't really know this.

 

[wereguy2]

I think the user base has at least a decent idea of what qualifies a good map

Not in my experience, they don't.

 

[hawk_767]

Should definitely take some of the work load of playing and reviewing all of the maps that are normally pending off of the mods backs. This way they can focus on reviewing the big maps and pointing out flaws, or even working with new mappers on things to improve.

 

[darkrider]

i think this could be useful for maps that never get approved... but im concerned about this kind of votes

http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/maps-564/sacred-war-revolution-5-2g-138359/index2.html

check coier's post and my reply after

 

[PurplePoot]

Not in my experience, they don't.

Feel free to elaborate.

 

[Squidle]

I hope it will not be abused.
Some people would never know the "real deal".

 

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

We still have map mods to clean out the filth.

 

[wereguy2]

Feel free to elaborate.

I simply find that people tend to give maps that are... well near-absolute crap scores that they certainly do not deserve. This may have something to do with them not being heartless and wanting to keep peoples feelings intact, but it just doesn't work this way.
Also, many people do not take things such as terrain, and more importantly, neatness, into regard.

 

[Linaze]

As long as a map is entertaining, it usually gets approved, since it actually being fun is absolutely the most important point.

 

[wereguy2]

Yes, that is why awful maps like Green TD are popular.

EDIT. Here is a good example.

 

[PurplePoot]

Yes, that is why awful maps like Green TD are popular.

If they are generally quite fun, are they awful? I would say no.

 

[darkrider]

I wander if this has anything to do with the new system

why i can only hover between -4 and 1?

 

[Pyritie]

I wander if this has anything to do with the new system

why i can only hover between -4 and 1?

rofl, give it a -4 and see what happens

probably just a bug, try refreshing

 

[darkrider]

lol, i couldn't give it a -4 because its my own map

but later i opened the link again and the negative numbers changed, so i thought it might be a bug... but it surprised me the first time

 

[wereguy2]

If they are generally quite fun, are they awful? I would say no.

They are fun, I play them (well, I used to play them, now I only play NWN :3), but c'mon, they are so awfully made, so imbalanced...
And no, that statement wasn't actually to reinforce my viewpoint on this, it was just... a random observation.

 

[PurplePoot]

There is of course a line between balance and fun that needs to be drawn. However, I find many more maps succeed at this than you give credit for.

As for the "kindness" point, this generally does not occur when the user is anonymous and thus not required to tell the submitter their vote.

 

[Dark.Revenant]

IMHO a map needs to be fun to be approved. If it's fun, it should get a 2 or higher, and be approved. Quality should decide the remaining points.

Anyway, I really hope this system works because it's nearly your only hope.

 

[Just_Spectating]

there should be a moderation section of this polled acceptance.

If there are any crashes in the game, the game must be rejected until fixed, or if the game becomes unplayable because of too many leaks (lag)

 

[PurplePoot]

there should be a moderation section of this polled acceptance.

If there are any crashes in the game, the game must be rejected until fixed, or if the game becomes unplayable because of too many leaks (lag)

There is. Map moderators still exist and are still working--this is just to complement them.

 

[darkrider]

if you are talking about my map...

unfortunately i think so

 

[wereguy2]

What?

 

[HappyCockroach]

I'm very positive to this system. I have a suggestion, though.
We can classify people for rating reliability. There are many people in the map section that gives detailed feedback and correct opinions, including leaks and bug reports. These should earn Moderating Credits. These credits could improve their 'Rating Power', giving more weight to their ratings than the normal ones. Can sound too childish, but it'd be good, imo.

Also... if only maps weren't protected, there could be a leak checking script that would notify the user rightaway of leaks.

 

[wereguy2]

Yes, that is a great idea, and would alleviate my concerns

 

[PurplePoot]

I'm very positive to this system. I have a suggestion, though.
We can classify people for rating reliability. There are many people in the map section that gives detailed feedback and correct opinions, including leaks and bug reports. These should earn Moderating Credits. These credits could improve their 'Rating Power', giving more weight to their ratings than the normal ones. Can sound too childish, but it'd be good, imo.

Also... if only maps weren't protected, there could be a leak checking script that would notify the user rightaway of leaks.

That already exists. The director of the section in question can assign special values for individual users.

 

[Vosty]

^^ I like that one. If one would become great enough of a rating value, they would basically become a FULL map moderator, which is true if you do a good job.

 

[wereguy2]

The director of the section in question can assign special values for individual users.

Not moderators?

 

[PurplePoot]

Not moderators?

No, except they could just ask the director and presumably would usually (if not always) be listened to.