Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Mapping Discussion
  4. Beatmap Management

[Discussion/Proposal] BN wide voting before nomination for questionable concerns

posted
Total Posts
9
Shmiklak
Elite Storyboarder
3,258 posts
Joined January 2015
Topic Starter
Shmiklak
Hello.

Recently I’ve been modding this beatmap with a quite questionable concept which may or may not be a subject for veto by one of my BN colleagues. During the process, the discussion of the concerns we had was done at least two times on the new #standard channel of the BN Discord server, however from what I can tell, these discussions do not really represent the opinion of majority as only a few people will actually participate in the discussion, neither would make me as a BN safe. While already being a good starting point for discussion of major concerns, I feel like we might potentially benefit from a newer system, rather than a #help channel with threads.

My proposal is to bring a system that would allow beatmap nominators to actually seek for opinion of majority before nominating certain beatmaps in a way similar to how vetoes are currently handled. While I do see major concerns with how this may be overused or create unwanted additional workload for beatmap nominators, I think it is still possible to somehow limit usage of this feature through moderation by the NAT members to prevent creation of polls that do not really need to be there in the first place.

Through implementation of this system, it might be possible to reduce the number of vetoes and disqualifications on the qualified sets as well as make nominators feel safer when dealing with potentially “dangerous” concepts that may not be enjoyed by the majority of their colleagues.

I will be happy to hear some opinions and critique on this proposal to ensure we as a team move in a right direction.
Last edited by Shmiklak , edited 1 time in total.
Riana
Beatmap Nominator
1,266 posts
Joined October 2012
Riana
yeah I agree that it'd be nice to see general consensus of bns before nomination and get clearance on a specific concept without putting bns into risk

technically something like submitting the map for veto mediation by one of the nominating bn might work since veto doesn't require a map to be nominated already iirc, but could make it clear that it isn't intended to be a veto
Ryuusei Aika
Elite Mapper
1,116 posts
Joined January 2016
Ryuusei Aika
Good idea. On the implementation, I agree with with Riana, it would be nice to implement it in a way that's the same with the current veto system -- as, in contrast of what Riana has said, for now you can only submit veto for qualified maps:
when highly controversial maps occur, a BN can simply submit the map to mediation regardless of its status -- that means you can submit veto for pending maps. And this should also be subjected to the limit of veto system, means that if the majority of BNs voted pass for the map, this should never be a further concern in the evaluation for nominating BNs, and the re-mediation can also only be done after a year in case of most BNs find the map does not suit the ranked section.

We should also encourage BNs to post any controversial maps in mode specific/help channels in the BN server before submitting a mediation, as BNs need to discuss first to find a map to be controversial. Personally I think submitting any maps without actual discussions among BNG should be considered as misusing of the system and should be considered in the BN's evaluation feedback. Other than that I think we should trust BNG's self-awareness.
Last edited by Ryuusei Aika , edited 4 times in total.
Protastic101
1,170 posts
Joined July 2015
Protastic101
#standard may benefit from thread creation that mania nominators have, i.e. prior to "risky" nominations, we make a discord thread with a ping to NAT-mania and whoever else we believe may have valuable input on a map to get as much feedback and opinions as possible to iron out any big problems before nomination. It's helped to avoid dramas on some questionable maps in the past.
Shmiklak
Elite Storyboarder
3,258 posts
Joined January 2015
Topic Starter
Shmiklak

Protastic101 wrote:

#standard may benefit from thread creation that mania nominators have, i.e. prior to "risky" nominations, we make a discord thread with a ping to NAT-mania and whoever else we believe may have valuable input on a map to get as much feedback and opinions as possible to iron out any big problems before nomination. It's helped to avoid dramas on some questionable maps in the past.
it is already the case, however the issue here is more about the majority of bns aren't really contributing to discussions on bn server due to how difficult it is to catch up
Noffy
Nomination Assessment Team
1,685 posts
Joined April 2012
Noffy

Protastic101 wrote:

#standard may benefit from thread creation that mania nominators have, i.e. prior to "risky" nominations, we make a discord thread with a ping to NAT-mania and whoever else we believe may have valuable input on a map to get as much feedback and opinions as possible to iron out any big problems before nomination. It's helped to avoid dramas on some questionable maps in the past.
Shmiklak mentions we have this already but i'd note it was only very recently created by achyoo based off the mania practices, so it being common use or go-to isn't really a thing and has not had the chance to be. Though i will note it isn't currently asked/mentioned anywhere to proactively ping, just making a thread.

I'd like to make better use of this however possible or with whatever changes it may need first.

While i can definitely see the benefit in getting more opinions, this is something I'd see that gets dropping engagement overall over time if over used compared to regular discussions that are already the people that would notice the map the most to begin with.
achyoo
osu! Alumni
442 posts
Joined January 2016
achyoo
I echo Shmiklak's sentiment, every time I post a map for discussion it's only a very select handful of people joining in so even if they give you the OK it doesnt feel reassuring.

But I also want to lament the fact that Shmiklak still feels the pressure to not nominate, if people are given the avenue to air their concerns and make their voice heard prior to the qualification of the map, but they dont, that should mean they are indifferent to the map being ranked so I would hope the BN would then gain confidence to push the map after the discussion in the channel. It's unfortunate that he still feels there's still the risk of the map being veto'd or DQ'd by another BN that ignored the opportunity to voice concerns but didnt take it until qualified.

We could give the channel more time maybe, to let it really be used as I initially envisioned because I really want std to become less fragmented at least for the BN side of things. Making everything a vote feels less interactive imo
Last edited by achyoo , edited 1 time in total.
RandomeLoL
Nomination Assessment Team
224 posts
Joined September 2015
RandomeLoL
I believe that having a standardized way to hold BN-wide votes would be a good resource to have. We've extra-officially done this a few times for very specific examples, so it would not be unprecedented.

However, I must echo what Noffy and achyoo have both pointed out. I believe this hasn't been tested enough yet as to have given it a fair chance. This is something we suggested to do from the other modes, and we haven't ran into the issues brought up.

I'm moreso concerned about this fear of nominating existing in the first place. Beatmap Nominators have enough things to worry about than infighting over who is nominating what. Holding up these discussions as to understand each other's PoV over a map I believe can be a healthy way to mend the team over time.

For the time being I'd suggest pinging the BNG into the threads though. Or at the very least the NAT so they can help pushing the discussion.

In any case, I wouldn't want the idea of holding votes to be used as "pseudo-vetos". And there are a few questions still left to be answered if that's done. Such as whether a map can be veto'd if it has gone through this proposed system. What if an issue is brought up by a community members outside of the BNG that hasn't been considered at the time of voting? Is it healthy for the community for these polls to only consider the opinions of BNs? Can we tackle this "Nomination Fear" in any other way?
Riana
Beatmap Nominator
1,266 posts
Joined October 2012
Riana
For the "nomination fear", not punishing bns for issues that were already brought up by them and discussed (and making it clear somewhere) could also be an option imo

One scenario for what I mean:
nominating bn found something potentially concerning, and brought it up for discussion in #standard (or maybe ask many bns for their opinions and attached it in note)

Majority of those who participated didn't find specific point problematic, and the bn decide to push map as-is.

In this case, bns shouldn't be punished for that even if the map gets vetoed and even be upheld for the issue.

They were aware of the potential issue and already put their effort to discuss it, and it was deemed to be fine
Last edited by Riana , edited 2 times in total.
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 9