{"content":"\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 2024-07-09T23:07:38+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I always thought that a cascading vote system like used in the current Content Review would be a good way to go about community involvement in vetoes.For reference, the current CR voting process is:\u2022 If there is a consensus of 70% on a particular answer from the combined GMT and NAT votes, that answer is used as the outcome of the vote.\n\u2022 If there is no consensus of 70% from the combined GMT and NAT vote, the BN vote is then merged into the total votes.\n\u2022 If the merged vote is 70% yes or above, the content is considered acceptable and is allowed to be used.\n\u2022 If the merged vote is below 70% yes, the content is judged to be not allowed for use and must be removed and changed immediately.<\/pre>Interestingly enough these numbers also align with the proposed 70% vote threshold proposed to keep a veto upheld. So, I think a community-involved veto mediation would work like this:\u2022 All NAT and BN in the contested mode are called to vote in the mediation. Additionally, s can opt in to vote during the veto (may need a system to decide who is allowed or not allowed).\n\u2022 If there is no consensus of 70% from the combined NAT and BN vote, the community vote is then merged into the total votes.\n\u2022 If the merged vote is 70% yes or above, the veto is considered upheld and the map cannot be nominated.\n\u2022 If the merged vote is below 70% yes, the veto is dismissed and the map may be renominated.<\/pre>This would theoretically address the issues of both community opinion being completely disregarded right now, while still keeping the power of the NAT\/BN to give insight based on mapping knowledge and experience.<\/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 Stompy_<\/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 935 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed March 2020<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Stompy_<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-07-09T23:15:02+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n The community should at least have some say in vetos since they are the target audience for the map and everything we do is for them no?<\/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 2024-07-09T23:33:37+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Stompy_ wrote:<\/h4>The community should at least have some say in vetos since they are the target audience for the map and everything we do is for them no?<\/blockquote>agreei find it similar to ur parents telling u dont do this dont do that, but they aren't always right\/thinking in your best interest.sure not every player is as experienced as the BN, but ultimately they are the most impacted, if they care enough to do the vote i think we should listen.in case of ranking a map, i dont think the worst case scenario is that bad if u let a \"bad\" map into ranked. We dont have to be so scared of letting community take control over this. who knows that something u consider bad today might turn to become a legend in future. taste is always subjective to person and time.i would go as far to say BN = 20% , community = 80% , with no upper limit on how many can vote, but there has to be a minimum amount for the community part to matter, say maybe 10x more than BN count.Willingly going against the community's opinions. -> im not sure how u can prevent this when u say community is only 20%also whats worse between ranking a map people think is bad, vs not ranking a map people think is good?i find it less drama\/problematic when a bad map is ranked. u can just not play itwhen a good map is not ranked, theres not much u can do as player<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by Drum-Hitnormal<\/a> 2024-07-09T23:37:19+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 ZiRoX<\/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 1,053 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed November 2009<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n ZiRoX<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-07-09T23:47:52+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Ryax wrote:<\/h4>I always thought that a cascading vote system like used in the current Content Review would be a good way to go about community involvement in vetoes.For reference, the current CR voting process is:\u2022 If there is a consensus of 70% on a particular answer from the combined GMT and NAT votes, that answer is used as the outcome of the vote.\n\u2022 If there is no consensus of 70% from the combined GMT and NAT vote, the BN vote is then merged into the total votes.\n\u2022 If the merged vote is 70% yes or above, the content is considered acceptable and is allowed to be used.\n\u2022 If the merged vote is below 70% yes, the content is judged to be not allowed for use and must be removed and changed immediately.<\/pre>Interestingly enough these numbers also align with the proposed 70% vote threshold proposed to keep a veto upheld. So, I think a community-involved veto mediation would work like this:\u2022 All NAT and BN in the contested mode are called to vote in the mediation. Additionally, s can opt in to vote during the veto (may need a system to decide who is allowed or not allowed).\n\u2022 If there is no consensus of 70% from the combined NAT and BN vote, the community vote is then merged into the total votes.\n\u2022 If the merged vote is 70% yes or above, the veto is considered upheld and the map cannot be nominated.\n\u2022 If the merged vote is below 70% yes, the veto is dismissed and the map may be renominated.<\/pre>This would theoretically address the issues of both community opinion being completely disregarded right now, while still keeping the power of the NAT\/BN to give insight based on mapping knowledge and experience.<\/blockquote>Side note: The 70% threshold for upholding vetoes was proposed to match the threshold for CR, instead of doing plain 2\/3.I agree that a cascading vote system could work, but I do think that when merging in the community votes, some weighing\/normalization has to be applied such that the BN\/NAT vote doesn't become TOO irrelevant.<\/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 Sanch-KK<\/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 209 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed October 2016<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Sanch-KK<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-07-10T00:13:12+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n lets just face it, mainstream player community only cares about pp at this point and the only reason they will participate in this voting is to lift vetoes from maps that could potentially give them pp and ranks (see recent armin map veto, or anything involving sotarks basically) and they will do it even if the map contains significant issues, and disregard them even if they see them, for them veto is something that somehow will prevent the map from being ranked ever, lol. Don't believe that giving those people right to decide something on this scale is a good idea.average player can't see the difference between what's considered rankable today and a jump practice, if you wanna move in that direction... sure? that will probably shift the perception of mapping for the new players and mappers, just how it happened with old-gen pp maps in 2017 and forward<\/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 Nao Tomori<\/a>\n\n \n osu! Alumni\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 3,078 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed December 2014<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Nao Tomori<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-07-10T00:56:00+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n agree w 228<\/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 3y3s<\/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 273 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed December 2015<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n 3y3s<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-07-10T01:52:47+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n it's easy to consume than reflecting on any piece of media, people who find maps to play are nothing different than browsing youtube for videos to watch, like 228 said, people are most likely influenced by people with a large follow count and just blindly follow that sentiment. You don't even need sotarks to tweet anything just wait until a top player tweet out a map is bad and see what event will unfold. Especially if the map was in their best interest to play it with the sole intention of gaining more ranks.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by 3y3s<\/a> 2024-07-10T01:53:31+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 Bloxi<\/a>\n\n \n Beatmap Nominator\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/a>\n\n \n 514s3l