{"content":"\n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Decku<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 192 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed November 2018<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Decku<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-03-19T21:15:10+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I have a few issues with this proposal, and I know sometimes all issues cannot be resolved, but I think it's a good idea to be mentioned since there are a few key distinguishing factors that I believe were mentioned but cannot be fully justified in the case. First of all, might I add that people in BN in all modes are or could be under the age of 18, and we all know that is a rejecting factor for getting into NAT (18+)SOME ISSUES<\/strong><\/span>I may not be the best person in of proposals, but the main issues I believe stem from these:1. The influence of BNs is very abnormal when it comes about talking about it to your friends. Imagine if someone just wants to be NAT just for the sake of it and they vote that person and did a bad job, is it still going to be a trial NAT just until elevated people on if they're useful in NAT..?<\/em>2. The influence of becoming a BN evaluator is no surprise there, but the overal evaluation process is a pivotal part into gaining experience for some people, and given the fact that the NAT do several different jobs and get more leniance on if they cannot meet their criteria if that's the case. If people can't evaluate as properly as they can be political in this case, then I don't see how option 2 of BN's choosing people into NAT would be the most efficient.<\/em><\/center>THE INFLUENCE PART OF THIS PROPOSAL<\/strong><\/span>The influence part of this proposal is a pretty big and probably a very disputable topic in all communities. The only reason why this is probably a very big topic is because of how biased it can be. E.g:Evaluators come in and one of the is your friend, you believe that they are a good candidate because you know nothing about the other candidates and if they're good enough to be NATHow are we certain that this system cannot just be focusing on not only voting 'for your friends' aspect, but also promoting neutrality in these votes if you do not know who another applicant is..? People in the BNG always have their friends on their sides, and it also promotes negative influence on certain aspects in communities of bigger populations. Not only that but it also may promote egotism if this was the case. NAT is a very authoritative position, and people who choose to want to be NAT should know about the cost and the effort they must make whilst in NAT. At least from the mania side of things, we have all our NAT's focusing on jobs and that should be no exception for any other game mode, especially bigger game modes. This also means that NAT should be more transparent with their BN-counterparts, which is why these proposals were made. Some Sort Of Solution<\/strong><\/span>I don't really have a solution for this, but I do personally believe that each mode should have an NAT leader. This is a huge aspect of it, and considering the only NAT leader is in taiko as we speak<\/del> they don't really grasp the other modes in full fluctuation. I do believe especially with how big some modes have been growing lately, especially with the BNG of certain modes as well, there's a big say into possibly promoting some sort of NAT leader as well to promote these types of things. At least some concerns from my end, but some of them cannot be fixed, which is why I'm very hesitant about this proposal.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by Decku<\/a> 2024-03-19T21:25:15+00:00<\/time>, edited 2 times in total.\n <\/div>\n \n \n uwu<\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Local Hero<\/a>\n\n \n Beatmap Nominator\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/a>\n\n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 139 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed February 2020<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Local Hero<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-03-19T21:26:07+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Decku wrote:<\/h4>How are we certain that this system cannot just be focusing on not only voting 'for your friends' aspect, but also promoting neutrality in these votes if you do not know who another applicant is..? People in the BNG always have their friends on their sides, and it also promotes negative influence on certain aspects in communities of bigger populations. Not only that but it also may promote egotism if this was the case.<\/blockquote>As opposed to the current system where the NAT hand picked candidates and whether they were or not qualified up to the standards of the NAT? I can get being against any form of non-merit system but we are working under the assumption that all of the are acting and performing in good faith. stating that a system can lead to some form of nepotism when a vote amongst the relevant team rather than internally is more transparent and a wider audience for scrutiny feels quite strange to me.Onto my own opinions, I do love having some autonomy within the process so I'm pretty excited to see these proposals, while perfering proposal 2 over 1<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Ryax<\/a>\n\n \n Beatmap Nominator\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/a>\n\n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 196 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed September 2016<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Ryax<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-03-19T21:38:20+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n How would the voting system in Proposal 2 work? (ex. preferential, single choice, multiple choice)<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n amogus<\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Hivie<\/a>\n\n \n osu!taiko Paragon\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/a>\n\n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,051 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed March 2019<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Topic Starter\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Hivie<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-03-19T21:39:26+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n exact details on the voting system can be ironed out once we figure out which direction we want to go.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \ua4b0\u2022 \u032b \u2022\ua4b1<\/span><\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n melleganol<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 628 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed March 2020<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n melleganol<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-03-19T22:07:25+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I'm against giving power to purple people, but I also feel that the RNG thing is foolish.Wouldn't it be better if instead of the current trial nat<\/strong> system, it was simply less immersive? smth like \"NAT application rounds\"<\/strong> and then go for the trial nat<\/strong> depending on the results, preselection would make much more sense.Idk how possible this format is or what the main problems would be, it'd be great if some nat can tell me if this is feasible.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Drum-Hitnormal<\/a>\n\n \n Beatmap Nominator\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/a>\n\n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,778 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed March 2011<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Drum-Hitnormal<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-03-19T22:27:34+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n with proposal 2Example:NAT picks person 1,2,3 and says we will promote 1 person to NATperson 1 gets 80% fail from all BN votesperson 2 gets 50% fail from all BN votesperson 3 gets 70% fail from all BN voteseach person gets voted or fail by all BNscan we set some threshold and say all 3 fail so no new NAT is chosen, NAT must pick different people on next round?<\/strong>i think its obvious someone is a bad choice if most BN says so, lets honor BN's choice in who can become their bossbtw, can we increase the min age requirement for becoming NAT? i feel 18 years old is not really enough life experience for someone to properly take care and lead a group of 20-40 BNs , also effectively affecting experience of millions of players<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by Drum-Hitnormal<\/a> 2024-03-19T22:30:56+00:00<\/time>, edited 1 time in total.\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Decku<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 192 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed November 2018<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Decku<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-03-19T22:35:36+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Drum-Hitnormal wrote:<\/h4>btw, can we increase the min age requirement for becoming NAT? i feel 18 years old is not really enough life experience for someone to properly take care and lead a group of 20-40 BNs , also effectively affecting experience of millions of players<\/blockquote>Don't think the age requirement needs to change, 18 is the legal age of adult and that doesn't mark the same as mental maturity. I do believe that when this comes into play it is noticeable from other NAT's and other BN's that someone has the mental capacity to be an NAT. This isn't about life experience, but more about what they can contribute into the NAT. I do fully believe about the \"all 3 fail\" proposal, that is definitely something that could be used if this proposal is accepted, but I am still against it.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n uwu<\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Hugged<\/a>\n\n \n Beatmap Nominator\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/a>\n\n \n 3c3k1q