Not asking for an exact time here, but rather a general time you spend for modding.

This ultimately goes to another question; how much time should we spend as a Beatmap Nominator?

There would be various viewpoints in this. It would be nice to share opinions.

To start with my case, I usually don't spend much time for modding since I mostly not take a look at the beatmap several times. (Situation varies, but in most cases.) Maybe you can infer from my short modding cycle, if you noticed. Maybe the time I spend is nearly similar with the beatmap's drain time, also including the time for thinking and typing my mods.

First of all, I've personally felt an initial checking of the beatmap was a powerful way to mod a map since we don't know how the beatmap will look like. The initial checking is the only session when a modding can see a map using "intuition". If the pattern was confusing in the initial checking, there are chances if the pattern has got a flaw resulting in a lack of initial readability, or rather it has got a nice reason behind yet to get revealed by once. Checking the map over and over will just get myself adapted to the beatmap and lose neutrality for the map imo. Well actually the intuition should be really important this case. When you lost intuition, that's when you need an opinion from someone else, but this is a different story.

Another point here I'd like to bring up is something related to the main task of a Beatmap Nominator; deciding to nominate the beatmap or not.

There are really lots of pending beatmaps waiting for a nomination, and ideally I think EVERY beatmaps should get checked by BNs, if it is really readied to get nominated or actually not. (Perhaps impossible due to the quantity of the pending beatmaps, and the size of the group but still.) Anyways, BNs are just normal users who are able to use their special ability, "nomination". That ability is not something that makes a BN mod "post" itself special since we are normal users. However we are not just normal modders by that fact. We are modders who can nominate maps. Normal modders mod every map they get requested, but we do not nominate every beatmap what we get requested. We don't have to, and should not nominate beatmaps which we deem are insufficient in quality. And it's not us who should ultimately improve that quality. It's the MAPPER THEMSELVES who should strive for.

Indeed we should give help if the mapper asks for, but what I'm saying is we should know how to give a general idea what the mapper should think about and give reasons for not nominating rather than explaining along a mod. Instead of spending our limited time compared to the amount of tons of beatmaps by giving a so-called full modding, we should just leave quickly and spend extra times for other maps, to ultimately check EVERY beatmaps by group members. This is where checking the beatmap only once becomes effective again. We can determine if the given beatmap's quality is sufficient or not, by just taking a look once. After that, we can make a decision. Does this map worth a nomination? If yes, commit a mod. If not, drop some general ideas and move to another map. Just as the disqualification post, it's just another format to deny the sended request without a heartbreak mark. Spending less time when unneeded helps increasing the efficiency of the main task as a BN.

I've saw modders doing a thorough mod, spending for like days to complete their post. It's really an awesome job since they are bringing up various points to think about. Still, remember the high amount of pending maps that should get checked. With the equal effort, the nominator could have checked several other maps if they didn't just sat at that single map. Then, the majority of mappers in this game wouldn't get stressed by the fact that BNs not checking their map, due to that increased efficiency. BNs won't also get stressed by the fact they should "mod" tons of maps.

Quality over quantity. Indeed.

But what would be the real quality as a nominator? 50 mod posts for 50 maps, or 100 lines of modding for a single map? Majority of modders seem to think the later as a quality mod post. But have you ever thought that 100 lines of modding could actually be a modding of quantity? When there are already 100 issues at a map, chances are high that map is not readied to get nominated yet. Struggling with that map to reveal issues would be just a loss of efficiency if you see from the big picture. Again, we don't have to nominate all maps what we got requested. We should know how to reject sended nomination requests (which normally comes with a form, mod request). With that in mind, those 50 mod posts for 50 maps also has got a chance to be a quality mod instead a quantity mod. Those might not be just random minor issue moddings, but rather containing a general idea in a brief post.

Modding speed might depend by person. The conclusion I'd like to make here would be that we must discern situations when we should pour full effort, and when we should not, for an increased efficiency we can build in this game as a Beatmap Nominator.

I've got a personal feeling that several modders aren't enjoying modding, but rather regarding it as a task. They consider modding as a highly burdening work, instead of treating it as a hobby that could be lightly done in few minutes. There is an old sentence, "mapping is a happy thing". But I hope there are more modders who think "modding is a happy thing".

To make osu!modding a better place, I believe changing the attitude towards modding could help.

when i can justify that a map is good enough quality to be ranked, the mod wouldn't take too long since i know the map is good. i just look for obvious flaws and unrankable stuff.

otherwise, it may take longer as i would need to explain what ur doing wrong and why it's wrong, etc

For an average mapset, let's say 2:30 mins and 5 diffs. I spend almost 1-1.5 hours. 2 Hours goes for exceptional cases.

I don't realy like to spend a lot of time modding, because as you say, some people don't find modding enjoyable and it rather looks like a task etc.
I can make very long and detailed mods, but that's not my intention. Quality is better than quantity, i don't really like to say a lot of things on a map because beforeall I respect mapper's style and map. Yes, you will find it weird and silly, because a lot of people are saying "plz respect mapper's spirit" (i find it very silly too because those who are saying that are stupid), but i don't really want to add a part of myself in a map made by another mapper. I also don't want to enforce an ideal mapping view.

I only point important things that should be changed to make the map better for everyone, i don't really suggest a lot of things concerning gameplay. Let's say, i rather point "mistakes" and find an alternative to improve that map concerning visuals and gameplay, rather than suggesting something else over something which already works very well.

Also, i don't rely on how patterns are arranged in editor, when i have doubts, i testplay a lot and see what is good or not.
I judge with my replay and with the way i aimed the certain pattern and my accuracy on it.


My viewpoint about how we should work :
We shouldn't really do long and very detailed mod if we plan to push the map forward. There are 2 different things between checking and modding.
If we really have a lot of things to say on a map, and if these suggestions are really important, then we should not immediately push the map forward after the mapper applied the mod, he should look for other mods (2-3) to improve the quality of the map.
BN is not a bubble/qualify machine, we are able to say "no".

Also, please, don't say that you will push the map forward and then you literally ignore the mapper, BNG. I saw it a lot of times.
It also happened to me lol.

Most of the time i take about 15-30 minutes for mods. I actually find that I spend more time modding good maps for friends, because I'm actually pointing out stuff that is already good and can possibly be made better, rather than stuff that is poor and needs to be improved.

For a time, I had a system where I would post something like this: p/3555815
on mods, and proceed to make really small "notational" style mods like "Spacing, See Above", "Emphasis", "Flow" without going into much detail in the hopes modders are able to read the more detailed explanation given above and make adjustments as necessary. I want to continue doing this, I mainly stopped because this style probably offends some more experienced mappers lol. I found it rather useful with beginner mappers though.

Agree with Kibbleru though. If I ascertain that a map is rankable quality, and I don't really feel obligated to improve the quality even further, it honestly doesn't take much time at all checking unrankable issues. Nowadays, the AI programs cover about 95% of objectively unrankable issues. You do have to check if maps are actually correctly snapped (3/4 vs 2/3, etc...) but almost all unrankable issues can now be checked via ModdingAssistant/AiBat.

Taking a TV sized, 5 difficulties mapset in mind, I'll take a maximum of 30 minutes to check. Modding in my eyes is just telling what you think is not right, rather than going into full detail - especially when you have to take care of a beatmap that has a relatively clean style (like mr triangle above me). For the more experimental maps, modding can take much longer though.

99% of the time I will start by playing the map first though, this already gives a general idea and stuff that's actually noticeable in-game. For most of the general stuff, tools can be used to cover most of the issues.

Wouldn't really say someone has to spend, or try to work towards, a specific amount of time of modding a beatmap, it's still something to enjoy rather than something that you're "forced" to do, right?

You can't expect a general answer or solution to this question yup. Every nominator has a different workflow and has different points of view concerning 'Is this map ready for nomination?'. While one part of the group usually focusses on searching obvious and unrankable flaws, others like to see quality improve even further and will check maps more thoroughly. Some like to stick to sets with mapping styles/people they are fond of and which they feel most comfortable with checking, others like to look for potential newcomers in the community.

I usually take about 2 hours for a 2:30min ENHIX spread set if it is from a mapper i don't know of, about 30~45 less when it's from a friend or someone i know the mapping style of and 30 minutes when it's a map with many obvious flaws. For experienced mappers: Aside from technical issues that hinder a map from ranking, I also set a bit more focus on quality improvement that improve the general representation of the map and check it out via testplay. I try to keep it compact although my mods tend to be longer than usual mods still.

I like to put a map in one of the following categories:
(1) If a map has major flaws, point them out to the mapper and recommend to map/mod more and find more modders for the set. Don't waste time on writing a full-fledged mod in this case.

(2) If a map needs polishment and seems ambiguous to you, state the critical points out to the mapper and see if he can make a valid point for them. If you don't find them reasonable, don't icon. Mods should cover up unrankable issues here and can go into detail on critical points e.g. to explain why a certain technique seems inappropriate, and find a compromise. But avoid getting nitpicky.

(3) If a map reached a rankable state in your eyes, check out for technical unrankable issues and then maybe quality-improving suggestions. Whether you go into detail or not for this kind is completely up to the BN and how he stands to the set. I wouldn't mind making detailed mods if it's a map+song i really like.

The last two categories should be the concern of BNs obviously. Also: A certain throughput of mods is unavoidable for a BN, but we should still be able to decide which songs we want to aid actively in the ranking process and which not.

Oh personally when I accept a request I love to give the best mod I can, so maybe I spend 1 to 3 hours in a mod. But depend on map quality a really good map can take like 15 or 20 mins a poor mapped one can take 3 hours +. Drain time of the map isn't a problem, sometimes a tv size take me longer than a 4 mins full set, because the quality.

About sonnyc idea about the quick mod thing, can work, but that can kill new mappers who need detailed mods to improve.