{"content":"\n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Ryuusei Aika<\/a>\n\n \n Elite Mapper\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,125 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed January 2016<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Ryuusei Aika<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-06-20T19:13:21+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Agree, this seems like a fair trade.Adding on this, I think providing the option of being able to anonymously vetoing would also help protecting the vetoers, considering how ridiculous the standard veto \"dramas\" were and how much personal attack the standard vetoers have been received in recent months. This can be done by something simple as BN(s) who're willing to veto can ask an NAT member to post the veto on their behalf.Downside of this option is higher possibility of malicious intent and additional workload for NAT if the latter need to double-check every veto post beforehand; these may be especially unwelcomed in T\/C\/M modes where vetoes have barely incited dramas.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by Ryuusei Aika<\/a> 2024-06-20T19:14:51+00:00<\/time>, edited 2 times in total.\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Monoseul<\/a>\n\n \n Elite Nominator II\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 75 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed January 2020<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Monoseul<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-06-20T19:24:00+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Honestly this would be better than removing vetoes altogether, +1Usually gathering multiple thoughts before deciding on a veto, instead of going for it alone and no preparation often goes more smoothly as well as discussion (most of the time), or at least people are more organized with their thoughts and what to talk about, and how to deliver that message.Will also help people's view on the validity of the vetoes\/process that went into making it.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n tilda<\/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 326 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed March 2015<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n tilda<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-06-20T19:52:19+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n okay, but would this not further encourage a \"group mentality\" though? i've already heard certain subdivisions being wrongly blamed for vetoes in the past; this wouldn't help it imo, considering a lot of people who would want to do such things might just ask a friend \"hey, wanna go 2nd?\"i do generally agree that people should talk with others before initiating a veto, but depending on the map one person can already get enough harassment for a lifetime :><\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by tilda<\/a> 2024-06-20T19:56:25+00:00<\/time>, edited 1 time in total.\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Nikakis<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 770 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed May 2014<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Nikakis<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-06-20T19:56:12+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n It wouldn't change anything because it's pretty easy to find someone to veto with, 2 bns to 1 is basically the same.10 BNs would be way better idea so vetos dont happen every once in a while like qualifying a map, they should have heavier value and justification, nowdays you can veto for basically anything. We kinda lost the meaning of what veto is supposed to be, slight improvements of a map that barely change the quality of it isn't a veto, its just a normal mod (spacing from 3,00 went to 3,30 wow fixed). And thats basically the reason that we are discussing on removing vetoes completely nowdays.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n clayton<\/a>\n\n \n osu! Alumni\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,978 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed November 2013<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n clayton<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-06-20T20:06:51+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n seems fine to try but I also wonder if it would have any practical effectRyuusei Aika wrote:<\/h4>Adding on this, I think providing the option of being able to anonymously vetoing would also help protecting the vetoers<\/blockquote>not a fan of this though, feels like QAT posting v2 and also unnecessarily marks the entire BNG as responsible for what only a few are pushing forward (prior to vote concluding ofc)<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n A r M i N<\/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 1,305 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed October 2014<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n A r M i N<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-06-20T20:13:19+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I think it's pretty easy to find another BN you're either friends with or whose views align with yours to you on the veto, especially if there are no to little repercussions if the veto goes south. This would hold back a very small portion of vetos and therefor maybe a move in the right direction, but not enough imo.now introducing v4v - veto4veto<\/span><\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Smoke<\/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 \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 377 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed August 2017<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Smoke<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-06-20T20:45:26+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n unless I misunderstand the change I don't think this will really change anything, pretty easy to get someone to agree with ur veto especially if u have bn friends that have similar mapping ideals to you and from my experience as a bn and convos I've had over the years, most vetoers get an opinion from 1-2 bns before vetoing anyway, kinda proof that this would change nothing since most vetos already get approval from 1-2 bns before being posted<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \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 627 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 2024-06-20T20:49:44+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n RandomeLoL wrote:<\/h4>Increase the number of Beatmap Nominators required to begin a vote to 2.<\/blockquote>Ryuusei Aika wrote:<\/h4>Adding on this, I think providing the option of being able to anonymously vetoing would also help protecting the vetoers, considering how ridiculous the standard veto \"dramas\" were and how much personal attack the standard vetoers have been received in recent months. This can be done by something simple as BN(s) who're willing to veto can ask an NAT member to post the veto on their behalf.<\/blockquote>rushing a pre-vote (10 at least imo) to push the veto could be a solution (obviously within the qualify time and not make the mapper wait even longer) and the anonymous function d be better for those who just read the vetoer's name and vote without reading anything, nats could simply say \"whoever misuses this tool will be kicked immediately\" so they don't even have to worry about itit's a bit absurd because they d still say it wasn't someone in their sd, but now there are a lot more bns so it might be worthwhile for the pre-vote and then the initiator with the votes can post the actual veto<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by melleganol<\/a> 2024-06-20T20:50:41+00:00<\/time>, edited 1 time in total.\n <\/div>\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 2e114v