Hey, just wanna discuss something here, hope no one minds
So posting as QAT thing came up, and I've asked a few QAT why is it here, who suggested and implemented this? From a QAT (not mentioning who), "common sense" was the answer given, including answers like "flames, drama happen after the DQ, so a way to relieve that"
This is recently discussed somewhere else but I'm just gonna necro it. In my opinion, we should state who DQ-ed the map. It's important, imagine if BN work as one, and rank a map, posting as "Beatmap Nominators decide to give a chance on the map". My point is it does not help to decrease haters or anything, and we do not know if every member of QAT agrees with the disqualification (DQ). Because, as far as I know (before) 2 members of QAT agree on a DQ and it's done. What we want to know is who is sitting behind the computer screen and click all the buttons, write the 10 pages long mods.
Hinsvar stated:
Okay, so the "Post as QAT" thing is here, really, let's see one of the post, what do we get:
Basically people are still posting replies likely "dramatic":
_
_
_
Apparently if a DQ contest is succeed, it's likely the whole team's fault, sort of discrimination like "oh look, it's a group of Asians". Also, that we know who is doing the job, who is not doing the job (busy irl something), and who is just fkin around.
And just so, I heard from some said, a part of QAT is not volunteered, they do not want to be QAT but did not sound, yet.
Roughly all from me, any opinion would be much appreciated, we should work together after all, not just QAT or BN circling each other in the groups, keeping everything "TOP SECRET".
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Edit: added my reply (23 June 2015, 10AM GMT+8)
Would be appreciated if this is going on
I wrote that essay there just to make it look buff, or maybe I should write it simple so everyone could understand? o.O
A few things for the MAPPERS and BEATMAP NOMINATORS here! (just to let you know I did not blame (or possibly offended) QATs for any disqualification)
So far, I have never seen any ridiculous DQs, and in my opinion, such dramas or anything is not needed, where most of them are started by those "top players" or BNs who do not want their score dropped because of the mistakes made.
And maybe, just maybe, we could be more open sometimes (QATs too). If you really want to learn and improve, you should listen to the others, try your best to accept opinions from the experts / experienced. Else, give your honest and deepest explaination of why you did not etc.
Another thing, when you guys writing a DQ post, make sure it's not too complicated enough, do not use your University or Ph.D whatever level of English, make them simple, not too long or hard to read. I believe if the mappers get the idea, they would mostly change.
Last thing to add, I would really wish when QATs write their DQs, they list who agreed to the DQ post, even it's only 1 - 2 person, it's totally fine. We know we can not get all the QATs together for a DQ all the time, hope you understand this.
Of course, further opinions are welcomed
So posting as QAT thing came up, and I've asked a few QAT why is it here, who suggested and implemented this? From a QAT (not mentioning who), "common sense" was the answer given, including answers like "flames, drama happen after the DQ, so a way to relieve that"
This is recently discussed somewhere else but I'm just gonna necro it. In my opinion, we should state who DQ-ed the map. It's important, imagine if BN work as one, and rank a map, posting as "Beatmap Nominators decide to give a chance on the map". My point is it does not help to decrease haters or anything, and we do not know if every member of QAT agrees with the disqualification (DQ). Because, as far as I know (before) 2 members of QAT agree on a DQ and it's done. What we want to know is who is sitting behind the computer screen and click all the buttons, write the 10 pages long mods.
Hinsvar stated:
- Nominators judge that a map is ready to be nominated
- The QAT judges whether a map is ready or not
- BNG, while a group, basically has its members working alone. Individually.
Okay, so the "Post as QAT" thing is here, really, let's see one of the post, what do we get:
Basically people are still posting replies likely "dramatic":
_
_
_
Apparently if a DQ contest is succeed, it's likely the whole team's fault, sort of discrimination like "oh look, it's a group of Asians". Also, that we know who is doing the job, who is not doing the job (busy irl something), and who is just fkin around.
And just so, I heard from some said, a part of QAT is not volunteered, they do not want to be QAT but did not sound, yet.
Roughly all from me, any opinion would be much appreciated, we should work together after all, not just QAT or BN circling each other in the groups, keeping everything "TOP SECRET".
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Edit: added my reply (23 June 2015, 10AM GMT+8)
Yay you get me ^_^Garven wrote:
I do agree the template needs work, and we are working to make it more useful for both mappers and the QAT.
Would be appreciated if this is going on
I wrote that essay there just to make it look buff, or maybe I should write it simple so everyone could understand? o.O
A few things for the MAPPERS and BEATMAP NOMINATORS here! (just to let you know I did not blame (or possibly offended) QATs for any disqualification)
So far, I have never seen any ridiculous DQs, and in my opinion, such dramas or anything is not needed, where most of them are started by those "top players" or BNs who do not want their score dropped because of the mistakes made.
And maybe, just maybe, we could be more open sometimes (QATs too). If you really want to learn and improve, you should listen to the others, try your best to accept opinions from the experts / experienced. Else, give your honest and deepest explaination of why you did not etc.
Another thing, when you guys writing a DQ post, make sure it's not too complicated enough, do not use your University or Ph.D whatever level of English, make them simple, not too long or hard to read. I believe if the mappers get the idea, they would mostly change.
Last thing to add, I would really wish when QATs write their DQs, they list who agreed to the DQ post, even it's only 1 - 2 person, it's totally fine. We know we can not get all the QATs together for a DQ all the time, hope you understand this.
Of course, further opinions are welcomed
