Actually I should've said "Nominators judge that a map is ready to be nominated as a ranked map" but whatever lolRakuen wrote:
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.
L M A OSieg wrote:
Emm... Dramas exist everywhere so being blamed/behatred is something usual in the Internet and in osu! so... What do you mean by writing 'additional punishment by community'? Like memes and 'oh lool it's dat nub trololololo go kill ursulf' and etc? If yes, well, it happens everywhere. Nobody's able to avoid it and there's always an option named 'BAN' if the hate is too harmful and of course some people can be silenced until they learn to behave and stuff.Wafu wrote:
Well.. it won't decrease the drama, but if QAT disqualifies a map with invalid reason, he'll be considered as the worst QAT because he did some wrong and might get offended. This way direct offense is not possible. If he is doing his job wrong, he'll be punished by getting kick-off the QAT - The QAT himself doesn't deserve additional punishment by community.
You won the night with Akatsuki girl (Log Horizon). Surely.Kodora wrote:
Make simple, clean and unsubjective DQ criteria and just follow them. No dramas gonna happen even once this will be done.Alarido wrote:
Second, how to avoid such drama?
P.S. I agree with Kurai.
Hey! Hi! Hello!lolcubes wrote:
Hi.
I really agree with Alarido.The QATs disqualify maps when a map have unrankable issues like wrong snappings,wrong metadata and other things mentioned by Alarido.Alarido wrote:
You won the night with Akatsuki girl (Log Horizon). Surely.
Making a very clear set of a few statements looks the best. So DQ would occur just if at least one of things below occur:
* wrong timing (obvious)
* wrong title/artist/source
* wrong mapped rhythms that are so obvious
* by request of mapper (for fixing something)
* nsfw video/sb/skins (explicit nudity or near-nudity)
* excessive/massive/song-unwise overmapping
Unplayability would be not an excuse for DQ except if something in the map break rules (e.g., burai sliders); otherwise, maps that are playable by thelewa/cookiezi/wwf may not be playable for you/me.
In addition, every QAT should be able to achieve at least an A grade in Expert difficulties in a minimum of ten mapsets.
Heh. You could easily turn this around you know. The mappers should be able to A rank their own maps!! :pAlarido wrote:
In addition, every QAT should be able to achieve at least an A grade in Expert difficulties in a minimum of ten mapsets.
╭( ･ㅂ･)وKrfawy wrote:
Hey! Hi! Hello!lolcubes wrote:
Hi.
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.
I've seen quite a few.Rakuen wrote:
So far, I have never seen any ridiculous DQs
this.Rakuen wrote:
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.
"was it ever railing", taken from a Skype group.Garven wrote:
Boy, it didnt take that long for this thread to get derailed, huh?
I'm ready to confess.Loctav wrote:
And stop qualifying things in the hope that the QAT will point up all issues, so you can be 100% sure that this is all that needs to be fixed to get it Ranked. QATs will not take over your or the mapper's work, ever. BNs heavily abused the idea of "Oh hey, let's go here and qualify it. If shit explodes, QATs will mod it to the extend that it is perfect after we applied everything they said. I do not even need to learn or to use my brain. That the QAT are actually doing all the work for us.... who cares!". That's the reason why we moved away from actually MODDING things or even cut out help quite frankly.
What is "quality" means?Loctav wrote:
The task of the QAT is to not allow maps to be Ranked that are of insufficient quality.
I did not get the answer I want here tho, I mean most of the disqualifications help, and I did not say anyone is afraid of DQsLoctav wrote:
The posts are not supposed to HELP. They are supposed to reason out why it didn't get ranked. You are mistaking their task as some sort of service to improve maps. You are wrong. The task of the QAT is to not allow maps to be Ranked that are of insufficient quality. Fixing that lack is not included. We reason why it lacks of quality. We do not give you options in how to fix it.
I'd say none of us think like this, this is just too emotional, if you know what means "time is money". None of us would like to waste our time (random bubbles / ranks), or if yes, they are the people you picked (or nominated recently). To avoid that, maybe pick BNs with more cautious?Loctav wrote:
And stop qualifying things in the hope that the QAT will point up all issues, so you can be 100% sure that this is all that needs to be fixed to get it Ranked. QATs will not take over your or the mapper's work, ever. BNs heavily abused the idea of "Oh hey, let's go here and qualify it. If shit explodes, QATs will mod it to the extend that it is perfect after we applied everything they said. I do not even need to learn or to use my brain. That the QAT are actually doing all the work for us.... who cares!". That's the reason why we moved away from actually MODDING things or even cut out help quite frankly.
Loctav wrote:
The posts are not supposed to HELP.
Source: https://osu.ppy.sh/forum/t/323905Love wrote:
We're here to help mappers progress, even the QATs are.
you still CAN talk to QAT by simply poking him ingame. you wont die if you ask him whether he participated in the DQ proccess, seriously. no reason to make an issue out of thisBaraatje123 wrote:
So if I could have talked with the involved QAT, I could easily ask them about the problem
Heck, even if you could just talk with QAT in general (don't even need to know who) if that's possible would be great
not everyone has access to thatCherry Blossom wrote:
#nominators.
If you ask any of QATs for the currently DQed map, I am pretty sure he will know no matter whether he did or didn't disqualify the map. From what I have seen QATs really explained me all questionable rules and there were not really differences between those explanations, so I would say that QATs have almost equal knowledge when it comes to rankability of the beatmap. But I agree that if it is not directly in rules or is not obvious, it should be explained well in the QAT post.Baraatje123 wrote:
But isn't it better to talk with one of the participating QAT, so they can explain better as to why that is DQ'able, and you can talk on whether your fix is acceptable
I have to disagree based solely off the result and lack of explanation in the crack traxxxx disqualificationWafu wrote:
If you ask any of QATs for the currently DQed map, I am pretty sure he will know no matter whether he did or didn't disqualify the map. From what I have seen QATs really explained me all questionable rules and there were not really differences between those explanations, so I would say that QATs have almost equal knowledge when it comes to rankability of the beatmap. But I agree that if it is not directly in rules or is not obvious, it should be explained well in the QAT post.Baraatje123 wrote:
But isn't it better to talk with one of the participating QAT, so they can explain better as to why that is DQ'able, and you can talk on whether your fix is acceptable
. Maybe you just got lucky and asked the QAT responsible for the DQ xD. But I can say for a fact this won't always happen.He forgot to post as QAT and edited it later.Baraatje123 wrote:
What recently happened also surprised me
I was e-mail subscribed to a thread, and I got an e-mail from a certain QAT member (not mentioning names)
I opened the link to the post, and it was from the QAT-team account
Either he forgot to post as QAT and edited after, or it is saved in such way (it's the first time this has happened to me though)
I never experienced something what was not upheld correctly from DQs, mostly QATs explained it well, if they did not in post, they explained it well personally and they weren't always even the disqualifying QATs - You can sometimes get this from last time they were logged on. But if multiple QATs actually cannot explain it or don't agree with it, then that's why we have "contest disqualification" here.monstrata wrote:
I have to disagree based solely off the result and lack of explanation in the crack traxxxx disqualification
The contest feature should be used when you disagree with the disqualification, not when you don't understand the disqualifying post...Wafu wrote:
I never experienced something what was not upheld correctly from DQs, mostly QATs explained it well, if they did not in post, they explained it well personally and they weren't always even the disqualifying QATs - You can sometimes get this from last time they were logged on. But if multiple QATs actually cannot explain it or don't agree with it, then that's why we have "contest disqualification" here.monstrata wrote:
I have to disagree based solely off the result and lack of explanation in the crack traxxxx disqualification
No, when there actually is no QAT to upheld the issue as being an issue, it's time for contest. It does not mean you did not understand the point - Mostly if you don't understand the point means it lacks a logic or reason that would be enough for a disqualification.monstrata wrote:
The contest feature should be used when you disagree with the disqualification, not when you don't understand the disqualifying post...
If you have any questions, please reply to this post and we will do our best to clarify any misunderstandings.And Contesting a DQ is exactly for "I DISAGREE and I have reasons". Please, for gods sake, read the stuff that is written all across the places! ;_;
We discussed this in #nominators, so for those who weren't there, so we avoid argues and more confusion.Loctav wrote:
And Contesting a DQ is exactly for "I DISAGREE and I have reasons". Please, for gods sake, read the stuff that is written all across the places! ;_;
I literally said that it is for those people who got the DQ, but there was no big reason from QAT, thus they disagree AND have the reason. My first sentence did make it a little confusing. I said that it is not for people who disagree, but I meant it is not for people who only disagree and didn't even try to understand the point of DQ - if it is really unclear, then sure, you should contest it.Wafu wrote:
Contests are here for people who got their map disqualified but the reason was not enough for disqualification.