As we all know the method by which most BNs' maps get ranked is B4B. My proposal aims to reduce the reliance on B4B and free up time for BNs to spend time checking non-privileged users' maps.

The Problems:
- already inactive BNs spend a lot of time modding other BNs' maps to rank their own
- the system in place has no incentive to nominate non-BNs' maps other than social pressure
- the system also provides no incentive or reward to maintain decent activity over long periods of time

The Solution:
- first, I define "extremely good BN" as a BN that maintains relatively high activity (let's say, consistently >5 nominations a month) with a low severe-issue DQ rate, checks a lot of non-BN maps, and stays alive for an extended period of time
- I propose creation of a 3rd class of BNs above the current "full BN" with quantifiable and extremely stringent entry requirements that show that they are truly going above and beyond the minimum expected of them as a BN
- upon meeting these requirements, these super-BNs would be allowed to place first nominations on their own maps - a 2nd BN would still have to sign off on the map

Potential issues with this system:
- optics - the optics kinda suck, however I hope that by having transparent quantifiable entry requirements that show that this group contributes to the community a TON and has a good understanding of map quality can justify them being rewarded with easier ranking process
- overhead and evalution - it might be a headache for NATs to make sure that super-BNs are meeting requirements, but I believe this can be resolved through use of nomination statistics that are already available (and looked at) - DQ rate and severity, % of B4B/non-BN nominations, average activity over a period
- abuse - BNs could still use this to push questionable maps, my argument here is that finding 1 BN to sign off on something stupid is about as hard as finding 2 BNs to sign off on something stupid (personal experience)
- reduction in nomination quality due to reliance on activity requirements - not quite sure how to fix this one, it may be the case that there are enough maps out there for every BN that would want to pursue this designation but not lower their quality standards for nomination can do so, but I don't want this to turn into BNs fighting over scraps of decent maps to maintain this status - though such a situation would arguably be ideal anyway as mappers would have a reaaaally easy time ranking decent maps

Benefits of the system:
- expanded rewards and incentives for BNs to contribute to the community while not punishing those with less time or lower motivation levels
- frees up time that BNs use essentially MVing each others' maps that are already fine to begin with
- ideally, raises the ease of ranking for non-BNs as BNs have more time to look at their maps and also would have their super-BN status tied to non-BN nominations

TL;DR - good BNs should be rewarded for being good by having an easier time ranking their maps, incentives should be aligned to what benefits the mapping community at large to prevent abuse

Nao Tomori wrote:

- first, I define "extremely good BN" as a BN that maintains relatively high activity (let's say, consistently >5 nominations a month) with a low severe-issue DQ rate, checks a lot of non-BN maps, and stays alive for an extended period of time

10/month tbh

make me super bn and it sounds good

(its a good idea)

make me super bn too and then we’re talking

don’t think this is a great idea though ngl

can't wait for the comments of controversial maps to be "wtf this guy is a super bn! power abuse!"

dPeace wrote:

can't wait for the comment of controversial maps to be "wtf this guy is a super bn! power abuse!"

real

Mordred wrote:

10/month tbh

agree, otherwise good proposal, incentivizes active and good bns while not punishing anyone in the process, could effectively solve b4b to an extent.

one alternative approach is, you can either:

- claim one (or more?) self-bubble every few months (maybe each eval period?)
- be awarded one (or more?) self-bubble with each eval you get

this would be granted when you have a specific amount of noms (10+/month) + good dq rate (can be judged with existing numbers just like nao said). that self-bubble won't count towards your activity but would affect you normally if it gets dqd.

this is a fine idea, better with hivie's idea of claiming & being awarded i think - and yea i don't think they should count towards activity

10/mo is legitimately way too high imo. like we would just run out of good maps to nominate and have ppl nominating garbage just to stay active. we saw what happened when 1 bn ran around bubbling anything and everything, having 10 of them doing that would be terrible. consistent above-average-but-not-really-high works better, like maintaining 5/mo for a year or something.

1 self bubble per 3 months is barely even a reward ngl

and yeah ofc no activity for self bubbles + could weight dqs higher

make requirements like 10+ noms/month with low dq rate and sev as said previously

perhaps count self bubbles as -1 activity to discourage constant self bubbling as it may put your position as super bn in jeopardy

otherwise may instead instate hard cap on self bubbles to something like 2/month to avoid abuse

other than that sounds like fine (?) proposal

Maybe that's just me, but wouldn't it be cute if BN in general only needed one additional BN for their own sets, considering they basically serve as first?

I'm aware there's a difference between yourself modding your own set and someone else doing it - different perspective and all that. But considering that this proposal is done to begin with - why not go one step further?

Nao Tomori wrote:

checks a lot of non-BN maps

Nah there are too many famous-named non-bn mappers out there. You know.... well-known establish mappers map are usually easy to nominated for BN perspective in my opinion
I think counting the mapper based on their number of ranked map is much better

Don't think it's really a good idea, with the greatest drawback being optics. Unaware of other modes but overall I think that if a map is good enough, finding (two) BNs is generally easy task specially if you found a first, so it would end up giving little improvement over the existing system anyway

If we want to incentivize good activity or provide rewards (which I think we should somehow) I highly doubt this is the way to do it.

Idea of inhibiting B4B from inactive BNs is nice,
but self-bubble is not a workable solution.
Or more specific, self-bubble isn't directly against the B4B action.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-> My Viewpoint 1: Self-bubble cannot help rising non-BN noms directly. It has a bug mentioned below.

The main problem is the one you mentioned above. Self-bubble actually simplified B4B process -> Now, BN is required to undergo B4B twice for two BN per mapset, in order to meet 2 noms requirement. But self-bubble make B4B condition simplified by undergoing B4B once for each map. Once a BN become 3rd-class BN, B4B process could go faster than now.

Besides, once B4B isn't work, non 3rd-class BN could still do in this way, by nominating with a group of several BN (min:5)? Example:

Set A is nominated by BN B & BN C
Set B is nominated by BN C & BN D
Set C is nominated by BN D & BN E
Set D is nominated by BN E & BN A
Set E is nominated by BN A & BN B

Both BN modded 2 maps in this situation which same as now. It is slightly complicated, but works. Point to notice that B4B is traceable, but nominating group is hard to trace. The possibility of undegoing complicated process cannot be ignored because it is a variant B4B. BN is still possible to gain their activity with 0 non-BN nominations.



-> My Viewpoint 2: Self-bubble obey the purpose of modding, which is for sharing others opinions, view and suggestions

I think the core value on the whole ranking process is on the modding, which is for improving mappers' work before pushing towards the ranked status. More modders give their opinion and suggestion would improve the map in certain stands, regardless of how big it is. Also, no matter if the mapper BN or not, how experienced the BN is, it still get a chance on having silly un-noticeable mistake, and that is hardly found on our own, example: combo-hex, NC issue, missing a clap/finish etc. Although these are not unrankable, but may be affect on players' gaming experience. That's why we need 2 BN for cross-checking, reduce the chance of having these inconsistent usage, and hence, increase gaming experience. Self-bubble reduced the minimum number of modders to 1, which is obeying the purpose of modding.

-----------------------------------------
I make a counter-suggestion here I don't think self-bubble works to solve the problem you mentioned.

Possible suggestion is -> BN set nomination counts a maximum of x nomination activity per month. (per mode)
( x could be any number below modding activity, for example 1. )

As your proposal is against for those inactive BNs gaining enough activity by B4B.
NOT FOR those active in modding non-BN set but want to rank their own set by B4B.

Idea:
1) inactive BNs cannot gain enough nomination activity by B4B only anymore. -> solving problem 1.
2) Focusing BN to mod on non-BN request for enough activity. -> solving problem 2.

For the 3rd problem about no incentive or reward, that's the reason why BN chose to B4B isn't it? Getting their own set ranked is a kind of reward for BNs imo. That's why I think B4B shouldn't inhibit in all ways. If you gain enough non-BN nomination activity, then why can't we rank our set by B4B.

Nao Tomori wrote:

The Problems:
- already inactive BNs spend a lot of time modding other BNs' maps to rank their own
- the system in place has no incentive to nominate non-BNs' maps other than social pressure
- the system also provides no incentive or reward to maintain decent activity over long periods of time

I am not going to propose it anyway. As BN activity should be handled by NAT, not me. What other BN do doesn't really affect me at all!


-----------------------------------------------------------------
Q) Did I write more words than the proposal :<

the only way i could see any system like this working in a way which is beneficial would be a pretty absurd requirement with a limited number per eval cycle and weighting dqs like 2x, because if you manage to make a mistake in your own map and push it yourself thats pretty dumb

that being said, with all of those added prerequisites i feel like it wouldnt even be that worth anymore (at least imo)

personally id rather just not have this exist, and if anything it could be trialed? and id prefer to propose something like this in that case:

- awarded to bns starting at 1 year of an active bn tenure
- 6 noms a month required to maintain it (2x minimum activity)
- 1-3 self bubbles per eval cycle (3 months)
- any dqs on self bubbles are weighted 2x as much, getting too many dqs on them revokes the title
- cooldown if the title is removed would be at least 1-2 eval cycles probably

but an issue that i think you look over is that im pretty sure there is no world where this would get past eph or peppy, since this system would go against a lot of the core value that this is supposed to be a volunteer position working for the community (no matter how much water this would end up holding as a valid fix to any b4b issues or whatever)

Why wouldn't people just circle-jerk instead? You get easy noms on your map and you dont have to do the 5/10+ requirement.

I agree with the sentiment that people should be rewarded for being very active but this isn't the correct solution (obviously from an outsider perspective)

AnimeStyle wrote:

Maybe that's just me, but wouldn't it be cute if BN in general only needed one additional BN for their own sets, considering they basically serve as first?

I'm aware there's a difference between yourself modding your own set and someone else doing it - different perspective and all that. But considering that this proposal is done to begin with - why not go one step further?

Genuine question is this a joke or are you serious

RyanTheWolf wrote:

AnimeStyle wrote:

Maybe that's just me, but wouldn't it be cute if BN in general only needed one additional BN for their own sets, considering they basically serve as first?

I'm aware there's a difference between yourself modding your own set and someone else doing it - different perspective and all that. But considering that this proposal is done to begin with - why not go one step further?

Genuine question is this a joke or are you serious

I'm dead serious with this. Not like I am extremly into the idea, but I'm honestly not seeing much harm in it. BNs already can easily rank stuff, and this only frees up ressources.

-> Mind you all the issues listed in the initial post are still present then, I just think that in the long run it would be a good change to at least consider

Quenlla: optics - yes, agree, optics are bad. again, can be countered by having really transparent and quantifiable standards on display to show why they deserve and are being given this privilege
Kyle:
- i don't think people would bother coordinating that stuff because they could just do normal b4bs anyway. and the type of BN that would pursue this designation generally actually want to contribute to the game instead, so i think this is too cynical.
- i agree that a cap on bn nominations that count towards activity is a good idea. i have proposed a similar idea before. i really would like to see this become a thing.
- that would only be a punishment - the goal of this proposal is to reward people for putting forth a lot of high quality contribution to the game, not simply punish them more than currently for being bad BNs.
radar:
- i don't think your proposed standards are so high that it isn't worth the effort. when i was an active BN i met most of those just through my own motivation, as do many current good BNs - this is a reward for that and an incentive to those who otherwise might not feel as motivated. a trial would be a great idea.
- i know the peppy/eph roadblock is probably gonna kill this on arrival but i would like to start the discussion anyway as a method of inciting changes. many things were initially vetoed and eventually made it into the system in some form, this can be one of them.
- i don't think rewarding extremely active volunteers and incentivizing them to contribute more is necessarily in direct opposition to the core tenets of the modding system anyway.

mr gay: people are already able to circlejerk, and do. this doesn't impact them. if they don't want to bubble their own maps they can continue circlejerking. this is a privilege for people who choose not to do that and instead spend their time contributing to the part of the community that can't randomly ask for bubbles in the BN server and get the map qualified in 15 minutes.

i don't think it's a good idea for any random bn to be able to nominate their own map because of several things, first the barrier to entry to full bn is very low, second without a proven track record of quality nominations they might fuck things up which ruins the optics of the whole thing and may make people resentful, third people should not be able to join bn and immediately reap the rewards similar to someone who spent a year helping others selflessly.

I'm not rly fan of the idea of giving this opportunity to ¨extremely good bn's¨. That thing would be extremely hard to measure since some sets require insane amount of work compared to some others.

Putting people in diffrent classes based on such vague term as nominations/month or dq rate isn't good idea imo.

Also i think everyone should be on the same line in the ranking process and no one should be given privileges. Bn's already have way above average social connections to right people to make mapping process slightly easier for them.

I feel like bn activity isn't something you should benefit from since it's a voluntary job and if you could get benefits such as nominating your own maps it could just get people with questionable motivation to join in and grind activity.

So I'm not fan of this proposal and think it shouldn't happen.

nominations per month and dq rate are not vague terms, they're about as objective as it gets... BNs already have privileges as a result of putting in effort above the average mapper, this would just be an extension of that. BN activity should be incentivized because active BNs make the ranking system more open and fair for everyone, your view that BNs joining and meeting high activity requirements just to occasionally bubble their own maps seems to miss the point that BNs joining and being highly active is extremely beneficial to the mapping community at large and is the entire goal of the proposal

ok but can we start agreeing that 5 noms/month is not "relatively high" activity when the majority of bns reach 5 already

(yes slightly more than 5 is also doable)

Nao Tomori wrote:

nominations per month and dq rate are not vague terms, they're about as objective as it gets... BNs already have privileges as a result of putting in effort above the average mapper, this would just be an extension of that. BN activity should be incentivized because active BNs make the ranking system more open and fair for everyone, your view that BNs joining and meeting high activity requirements just to occasionally bubble their own maps seems to miss the point that BNs joining and being highly active is extremely beneficial to the mapping community at large and is the entire goal of the proposal

I can see this and yeah you have a point. but as basen said below 5 noms per month feels kinda low. You can basicly work with one experienced mappers map per weekend and still meet the requirement which feels at least in my opinion not that high of a activity. But i still think nominations/month and dq's aren't the best measurements for activity and there should definitely be other things considered too.

I think something closer to what mordred suggested would be much more reasonable. And i can see many possibilities of this kind of self nomination thing causing serious backlashes from the community if there isn't extremely strict rules for it.

I don't really see this working under any reasonable model. It's like allowing self-reviews on github PRs - there's a good reason why most OSS projects don't allow that kind of thing.

If we had stronger systemic support for kudosu (and more policing of it), I could maybe see it offered as a self-service you purchased with your kudosu as a reward for helping others. Is fundamentally limiting the amount of independent checking a map receives really something that can be considered as a "reward", though? Maybe for the BN, but it does kind of put the players at the risk of being punished by a set with potentially more issues.

One key difference is that osu! is a kid's game. The worst thing that can happen is drama between teenagers, versus introducing a bug or vulnerability into critical software.

Nominators should be allowed to nominate their own maps, especially those that actively push other people's maps and create content for the game. The reality is there's too many mappers and modding takes time. Self-nomination is a way to free up time, but in the future it may help to simplify the ranking process overall.

AnimeStyle wrote:

RyanTheWolf wrote:

AnimeStyle wrote:

Maybe that's just me, but wouldn't it be cute if BN in general only needed one additional BN for their own sets, considering they basically serve as first?

I'm aware there's a difference between yourself modding your own set and someone else doing it - different perspective and all that. But considering that this proposal is done to begin with - why not go one step further?

Genuine question is this a joke or are you serious

I'm dead serious with this. Not like I am extremly into the idea, but I'm honestly not seeing much harm in it. BNs already can easily rank stuff, and this only frees up ressources.

-> Mind you all the issues listed in the initial post are still present then, I just think that in the long run it would be a good change to at least consider

See, the thing about pushing this as a change is that its implicated that bns are perfect beings, in a sense.

Ephemeral wrote:

I don't really see this working under any reasonable model. It's like allowing self-reviews on github PRs - there's a good reason why most OSS projects don't allow that kind of thing.

If we had stronger systemic support for kudosu (and more policing of it), I could maybe see it offered as a self-service you purchased with your kudosu as a reward for helping others. Is fundamentally limiting the amount of independent checking a map receives really something that can be considered as a "reward", though? Maybe for the BN, but it does kind of put the players at the risk of being punished by a set with potentially more issues.

You would be my genuine hero if you would male kudosu useful again in some way or another. That's the only thing I am missing from the old modding system

gonna close this thread as it's no longer active and *super bns* aren't going to be a thing for the foreseeable future. if bn systems become automated down the line, that'd be a more fitting time to consider this probably