ah yes... vetoes. for a reason unbeknownst to me for the longest amount of time, they are the single point of constant aggression on this game for discussing disagreements in mapping. regardless of the opinions on the effectiveness of vetoes or the lack thereof, i think there's something about vetoes that actually isn't necessarily fair, and that's that if a veto is upheld, and both the mapper and the vetoer are as stubborn as an ox, that veto essentially turns into a good ol', moddingv1-era nuke.
the veto has been reworked time and time again to ensure that it's fair to all parties involved, and i think that it has reached one of the best points in time that it has ever reached in my near 8 years in the osu community. the only caveat to a veto that is never lifted or resolved is that mapping metas change-quality standards change, player abilities change, and over time and especially in rhythm game communities like this one, things that seemed outlandish months or years ago no longer is. for that reason, i'd like to propose a slight tweak to the mediation process.
below is the wiki article for upheld vetoes. amendments to the wiki relevant to this proposal are bolded.
go, discuss :>
the veto has been reworked time and time again to ensure that it's fair to all parties involved, and i think that it has reached one of the best points in time that it has ever reached in my near 8 years in the osu community. the only caveat to a veto that is never lifted or resolved is that mapping metas change-quality standards change, player abilities change, and over time and especially in rhythm game communities like this one, things that seemed outlandish months or years ago no longer is. for that reason, i'd like to propose a slight tweak to the mediation process.
below is the wiki article for upheld vetoes. amendments to the wiki relevant to this proposal are bolded.
If the beatmap veto is upheld, the beatmap may not be re-nominated until appropriate changes are made that remedy the issues present or if a specific amount of time has passed since the upheld verdict has been made.faq vis a vis expiration:
In order to re-initiate a mediation which resulted in the upholding of a veto, either the vetoer has to change their mind, or members of the jury that upheld has to change their minds to the point where the result of the mediation would have been different. This will re-initiate the mediation with a newly randomly selected jury.
Once changes are made to the beatmap, both the Nominator performing the beatmap veto, as well as the jury members upholding it, will be called to recheck the beatmap and decide individually if the issues have been satisfactorily addressed.
If 6 months has passed since the posting date of an upheld verdict, the verdict of the mediation is said to be "expired." At this point, mediation can be re-initiated without any of the above requirements being met. In this re-mediation process, the assigned nominators to evaluate the validity of the veto cannot be apart of the first group of mediators from the initial verdict.
If after re-mediation the initial veto is still upheld, this verdict, and each one that takes place after it, will not expire for 1 year. Expiration is no longer valid if every BN from that respective mode has been exhausted in evaluating the initial veto. At this point, the process for moving forward with an upheld veto returns to the aforementioned requirements.
- why 6 months? why not shorter?
well, expiration is supposed to be a "last resort" of sorts, if vetoes expire too quickly stubborn mappers will wait until the cooldown as oppose to attempting to work with the vetoer. - why can BNs not repeat in expired mediations?
it's highly likely that BNs that have already evaluated a veto for its validity will vote the same way as they did before. this is no guarantee, but i think in these cases its smarter to ask new people as oppose to the same people. - what happens if the remainder BNs cannot form a full group of mediators? (in the cases of repeated expirations)
in this case, i would personally say that this counts as expiration no longer being viable. i suppose there are arguments that as long as the mediator number is odd there can be a decisive verdict, but that is most certainly up for discussion.
go, discuss :>