Honestly, these changes shouldn't be made by people who haven't been very
active in the modding community. It's become very clear that QAT's no longer have a presence in the qualified section. If you are actively checking/bubbling/qualifying maps, you'll notice that QAT's nowadays almost exclusively disqualify maps based on either: metadata, AiMod, AiBat and/or Modding Assistant related issues. This is a problem if you want to maintain a quality standard above "rankable".
The current disqualification process is heavily based on members of the community pointing out subjective issues and reporting them to the Disqualification thread. At present, I can't speak for other BN's, but right now I only expect QAT's to check for objectively unrankable issues.
and whether a Normal should be renamed to AdvancedBecause of this, there is a lot more leniency and freedom in terms of quality standards. Mappers are able to map more freely to how they envision their maps to look, and BN's don't feel as concerned about qualifying these maps because as long as they are 100% objectively rankable, concerns raised by the community can be debated and rejected. It may take a disqualification, but DQ"s are no longer absolute and no longer demand a certain change. What this means is that no matter how low quality a map may appear for someone, as long as the mapper explains their viewpoint, they are not obligated to fix anything, and the current system will allow them free passage.
Lets not forget about situations like
this where even despite a mapper being willing to make changes to their map, the map ended up not getting disqualified. Nothing about Side's mod pointed out objectively unrankable issues. That doesn't mean it wasn't helpful. Actually, Anxient even replied to the mod and was ready to fix a very large portion of the issues brought up. Stuff like this should not be discouraged. Rather, it should be encouraged because with a clear lack of QAT presence, this is currently the best way to improve the quality standard of maps flowing into the game.
I think CB's intentions were to discourage Modders/BN's from being "wannabe QAT's" and making these post-disqualification mods with the intention of getting maps disqualified. While stuff like that does happen, I really believe that the majority of post-disqualification mods aren't done to spite anyone. It's when you have cases where a certain modder/BN goes out of their way to say something like "whoever helped push this map forward should be removed from the group" that disrespectful and spiteful attitudes begin to surface. So yes, I can relate to CB's intentions for changing the wording, because it does try to prevent stuff like dq'ing for the sake of dq'ing from occurring, however I feel it's doing more harm than good.
You can compare the wording of stuff like
p/4715351 where the modder is very harsh, always asking the mapper to explain themselves, and going out of their way to say that their very lengthy mod post only took them 20 minutes to do. These kinds of mods are often problem-based, as in they try to point out problems in the maps.
Compare it to stuff like
p/4871584 or
p/4916184 or
p/4916778 where the mods, while pointing out problems, also offer solutions and alternatives and even mapping tips for future reference.
Anyways, what do you guys think? I'm personally rather neutral to post-disqualification mods. I know i've expressed dissent with them in the past, because some post-dq mods look like a bunch of nazi issues that seem to be done for the sake of dq's. However, as of recently, more adept and knowledgeable BN's have been taking the time to check and make these same mods, to the benefit of the mapper. I think this is the best way to preserve a standard of mapping above rankable, while still allowing mappers breathing room to explain and discuss their intentions.
