If the creator shows no evidence in beeing interestet in his comments thread and willing to modify his map to fit the standards - Where do we draw the line on that? Some maps the author actively updates and look for new opinions - See Tar Wars :) Others, like epidion, doesnt seem to care at all. he just uploaded a bunch of half-dones and left them like that? (correct me if im wrong, i havnt been checking his every map). Should there be some time limit to keep in touch until the map is "done" ? to make sure quality maintains? Tell me when im crossing the too-dedicated line :P
There is plenty of webspace for the small mapfiles. Maps that are not updated and commented on sink to the bottom of the page. I think as long as they are "beta" maps, we can just let them stay there. On a message board you will not delete the old threads, too. That's pretty much the same here imho.
i would create a new category since Beta-Maps is for maps that are updated since they become final maps.
So just make 2 categories "Beta Maps" and "Shitlist" or smth like that at the "In progress" district.
At shitlist you can put all maps that dont fit into other categories and what you said above...
My point was more regarding the maps that WE comment and discuss much about, but the author is not present thus nothing will happen at all. think about it next time you look in a map comment section. its not very often the authors actually visit the thread and defend their map, or edit it at all. many is just onetime visitors uploading. Then the map still get high on list, but nothing happends.. I know what your refering to (panschk) but thanks to our discussions it doesnt work that way. whats the point in having such maps if creator doesnt care to make them perfect enough to fit in user-final anyway :P User-beta category seems pointlesss then (although some creators are active! creds)
Would you be willing to look through all the maps and to put them in the right category like once a week? I probably won't, so it'd be good think of the work that would be involved if we actually do it that way. Actually I could also write a script that searches all entries in "user-beta" that are older than a month or something (date of last comment), and that either gives them an other maptype-attribute or asks how to proceed. Do you think such a script would help (It would be something that would have to be activated once in a while by a user)
Back to maptypes:
pro (professional maps (korea))
ex-pro (former pro-maps)
? <-something for non-korean maps that were played in BWCL, WGTour or smaller online leagues
user-final (finished and at least "ok" user-maps, but that are not good enough to be...)
______ finest (______will be the websites name when we have a real domain. Only users that are active on this site from time to time are allowed in here, only the finest maps should make it in there.
user-beta (like it is today)
user-abandoned (maps that were posted here and never reached "final"-status.
and maybe other classes whenever wo do a contest or something. Could be changed aferwards.
But as I said, if nobody is going to do all this work, a simplier system may be better.
If we have a script that tells us when a beta map is not beeing updated or commented, it would be good to have them put on a separate admin list where we decide what will happen. A Month is too long though. 2 days in the SC universe is like a week in real life, so i say not updated in a week, they go to thats special list. If author is away or something, he can just reupload when he gets back.
Maps in WGT BWCL = Semi-pro maps :)
please rephrase the
"______ finest (______will be the websites name when we have a real domain. Only users that are active on this site from time to time are allowed in here, only the finest maps should make it in there.
". I don't understand what you mean. :(
I _can_ do this work whenever I can, if there is a separate list where the abandoned betas go to. And then i can look through the entire list bit by bit from time to time too. But then i need authority to put a map where i think it should be placed :P
During this summer i will be working from time to time and a bit of vacations, so there will be several breaks from this site and from internet. But I have been making maps since 99, so if you have the interest in keeping this site up, ill be here cleaning it as often as i can:)
It ok to have a 'finest maps'-category or similar, but it certainly shouldn't be exclusive -like you had to be an active member here to visit it. In order to become popular this site must host good maps that are easily downloaded. If it fails to do so, visitors will not be returning.
I agree something needs to be done about the ratings or they should just be removed. Rating things on a scale of 0 to 10 is too complicated for the masses to do properly. You could have a "veto" option and see which maps are vetoed the most, a simple thumbs up or down. That would work better.
I agree. 10 is too much for almost every map, and 0 is too low. There can't be a fair rating with such large point scales. i know its just a "funny thing" to vote, but many authors take it quite seriously. its not fair that some idiots can ruin that by voting very low "just for fun" :/
Other Systems are just as easy to abuse. It's like the stupid polls on most homepages. They look nice and all, but you can't use the result for any meaningful decisions. Of course we would decide which map is MotW, who else could do that? Gerhard Schröder will have much spare time come from september on, but until then we'll have to do it ourselves.
The 'thumps up and thumbs down system' sounds good to me. An 'approval system' like this has the advantage that it is much simpler to read for the author, and therefore somewhat more helpful. Instead of displaying an average of points, the number of users voting 'approved' contra the number voting 'disproved' should be displayed.
This would serve to show the map creater exactly how big a part of the audience his map pleased, rather than resulting in an averaged score that indicates the map would have a set place in the total map hierarchy. I would really like to see a system like that here, it is much more fit for this purpose.
Exactly! And there really is no point in the possibility to seperate the outstanding map (with 9) from the good map (with 7), since other voters will surely water-out the clear message that you tries to state.
I don't see a problem with you thumbing up on 90% of the maps. Everyone judges differently, and I for instance might thumb up less frequently. That's all fine as long as everyone judge consistently in regards to their own expectations/demands. The total number of thumb ups versus downs isn't important, but when compared to other maps it gives the author an idea about the map's capability of 'crowd pleasing'.