I'm going to be focusing on this rule on my main suggestion:



You might probably not know, but this rule only applies when the nominators are being evaluated. This means that even when they fall under 6 nominations for a period of 90 days, they will still not be warned or kicked even though the rule is clearly violated.


My main proposal would be to change how this rule is enforced. It should be enforced so at least if someone drops under 6 nominations at any time; they should be removed from BNG immediately if they have not provided any kind of prior absence notice, bypassing any evaluation period.

The rule can also be reworded a bit to indicate this point:

This change will ensure that beatmap nominators will have to stay more competent, at least over the bare minimum threshold.
The current system is flawed enough that if someone was performing well enough then they get their eval timed for 6 months for it, they can theoretically stay in the group through those 6 months with 6 nominations if they stay AFK for 3 months and nominate 6 maps.



I also wanted to talk about a side suggestion that would also work well with the main change if its done.

I'll be talking about the current warning system for activity checks.
If you didn't know, BN activity is checked at the start of every month automatically and an activity report to NATs is made which consists of users under minimum and bottom line activity separately.

These warnings should not just be sent out just at evaluations, it would be much better if they get warned immediately if they hadn't submitted an absence note then have their eval timer is set to 1 month to comply with the rule:

BNG had been having its one of the worst times for a while. On osu!taiko, many BNs had been staying under minimum requirements resulting in osu!taiko having its one of the worst times in ranking and many standard BNs being removed for activity requirements, and I believe this change will incentivize people to try and maintain minimum activity.

Glad this is posted by a BN. Didn’t read through the whole post by I got the gist of it; sounds good to me. If this is enforced hybrid junkies like me had more chances of getting BN faster since nominators are required to perform more competently if they don’t want any unfavorable consequence.

I don’t have any issues with BN since I haven’t interacted with them long enough.

Thank god someone finally said it.

i don't think this will work very well. bns already have basically zero incentive to mod maps other than being bored and having spare time. being more punitive will just trim down the barely active users faster. there are benefits to that, like overall team morale and stuff, but i don't think that yelling at bns to do more will actually make bns do anything, it'll just narrow down the group to people that don't mind being yelled at.

Lower the unsaid standards in mapping a bit so that modding takes less time and bns will push more maps with same amount of effort, easy solution

mouc wrote:

Lower the unsaid standards in mapping a bit so that modding takes less time and bns will push more maps with same amount of effort, easy solution

most bn mods are for finding mistakes and not to actually improve the whole map, so this wouldn't fix anything

also making the ranked section a "quantity>quality" place is just a bad idea in general lol

generally tend to agree with nao's sentiment, the balance between BN standards and BN retention is something that does need to be balanced, although I have no idea if this specific change would jeopardise that balance

however, the main problem outlined in the OP seems to be that the de jure standards aren't being enforced, which I do think is a genuine problem. in addition to the solution presented in the OP, this can also be fixed by rewording the rule to match how it's currently enforced. I don't have enough insight to really care which way the discrepancy is fixed, but I do think it should be fixed

Nao Tomori wrote:

but i don't think that yelling at bns to do more will actually make bns do anything, it'll just narrow down the group to people that don't mind being yelled at.

this post isn't actually focused on "increasing" the current bn activity or telling people to nominate more often, it just makes the current rules be enforced properly and makes the wording much clearer. my focus with this post was nowhere near increasing the activity, instead making it more clear that minimum activity is important.

Nao Tomori wrote:

being more punitive will just trim down the barely active users faster.

this is true, but if you think about when they are already not compiling with the bare minimum requirements if they are removed there is like no big difference.