Just going to bring this old topic from the grave. I'll bring up a scenario as I'm not a great writter.
Player B mapped a map set and Player A mapped a guest diff for the set. However, Player B figured he can no longer upload his map (there is absolutly no way to upload except to have someone else to log in to his account somewhere else). Player B even had more then enough slot to upload the beat map. This is a trouble, but Player A kindly offered his remaining map slot (yay!). Unfortunately, this map got nuked because it violated the Map Accountability Rule. However, because of this unique case, there was a BAT discussion over this issue. It was never revealed as the solution they came up with was to lock the thread of the map and make Player B to erase all his name on the beatmap or let it graved.
You can follow up the (revealed) case on this link
Points to be considered:
Personally, I don't see how this could possibly threaten the gameplay itself. All what Player B wanted to have was his name shown on the difficulty name. Most BAT's first reactions (who have posted on the thread atleast) were in disagreement. Why would that be? The rule must be based on common sense since Map Accountability isn't much of a technical issue. You could tell there is clearly something wrong when BATs can't agree on such issue. However I'll leave the past behind since it's pointless now. All I want is the discussion and the conclusion BATs had to be revealed. It would definately help to bring an inprovement to this rule.
P.S. Why did I give up last time? Because I didn't want ouran and DxS's effort to end up in the graveyard. Personally did not minded having this map graved.
Player B mapped a map set and Player A mapped a guest diff for the set. However, Player B figured he can no longer upload his map (there is absolutly no way to upload except to have someone else to log in to his account somewhere else). Player B even had more then enough slot to upload the beat map. This is a trouble, but Player A kindly offered his remaining map slot (yay!). Unfortunately, this map got nuked because it violated the Map Accountability Rule. However, because of this unique case, there was a BAT discussion over this issue. It was never revealed as the solution they came up with was to lock the thread of the map and make Player B to erase all his name on the beatmap or let it graved.
You can follow up the (revealed) case on this link
Points to be considered:
- Player B had 2 slots to upload, but could no upload the beatmap due to restriction on his Internet
Player A did not mind giving up his slot
The diff spread was 3 diff from Player B and a diff from Player A (75% > 25%)
Personally, I don't see how this could possibly threaten the gameplay itself. All what Player B wanted to have was his name shown on the difficulty name. Most BAT's first reactions (who have posted on the thread atleast) were in disagreement. Why would that be? The rule must be based on common sense since Map Accountability isn't much of a technical issue. You could tell there is clearly something wrong when BATs can't agree on such issue. However I'll leave the past behind since it's pointless now. All I want is the discussion and the conclusion BATs had to be revealed. It would definately help to bring an inprovement to this rule.
P.S. Why did I give up last time? Because I didn't want ouran and DxS's effort to end up in the graveyard. Personally did not minded having this map graved.