Yall wild 😂👌🏻
You think I care about whether or not I'm adding to this meaningless discussion whose only purpose is to just incite meaningless G&R shitM3ATL0V3R wrote:
Oh look another khelly post adding nothing to the discussion.Yuudachi-kun wrote:
Haha look another useless railey thread intended to make argue for 10 pages
Fair enough, I understand if you don't want to get involved. Though the actual points discussed is interesting if the drama is disregarded.Yuudachi-kun wrote:
You think I care about whether or not I'm adding to this meaningless discussion whose only purpose is to just incite meaningless G&R shit
I'm just here to point out that: This is like the 4th time Railey feels like he has to do this
The problem with a system where people people rate maps by 1-10 is that different people have different standards for which value means what (some people would consider "5" average, "7" outstanding, and "10" incredibly good; while some people consider "9" average, and "10" good).M3ATL0V3R wrote:
They don't always oppose the map being loved, they usually just prefer it over another. If the community could instead rated the maps by 1-10 rather than there being a binary vote or not vote you would see a different story.N0thingSpecial wrote:
OK extreme situation but my point is that lets say there's 3 maps for loved and you can only cast on vote, and he results are two maps with 33%, and one map with 34%, in the current system the map with 34% would be in the love section, but technically there's 66% of the voters oppose that one map being loved, so despite being the "majority" it's not an accurate representation of what the community wants
That is a good system for a small candidate pool but when many maps are considered 1-10 is best. If every person had do list their preference for every map over each other it would be exhausting for the participants. That's why they use the 1-10 system on myanimelist, imdb, etcFull Tablet wrote:
The problem with a system where people people rate maps by 1-10 is that different people have different standards for which value means what (some people would consider "5" average, "7" outstanding, and "10" incredibly good; while some people consider "9" average, and "10" good).
Also, it is prone to abuse: people when they vote, want to maximize their own voting power, so if they think a map deserves a rating of "8", for example, they vote "10" instead to make sure the rating is pushed up (voting "8" would just be a weaker vote).
Instead of a rating system for votes, a better system would make each vote consist of a ranking of candidates from best to worst. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_tr ... te#Example
Including everyone on the list in each vote is not mandatoryM3ATL0V3R wrote:
That is a good system for a small candidate pool but when many maps are considered 1-10 is best. If every person had do list their preference for every map over each other it would be exhausting for the participants. That's why they use the 1-10 system on myanimelist, imdb, etcFull Tablet wrote:
The problem with a system where people people rate maps by 1-10 is that different people have different standards for which value means what (some people would consider "5" average, "7" outstanding, and "10" incredibly good; while some people consider "9" average, and "10" good).
Also, it is prone to abuse: people when they vote, want to maximize their own voting power, so if they think a map deserves a rating of "8", for example, they vote "10" instead to make sure the rating is pushed up (voting "8" would just be a weaker vote).
Instead of a rating system for votes, a better system would make each vote consist of a ranking of candidates from best to worst. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_tr ... te#Example
Ok i guess its better then, my bad.Full Tablet wrote:
Including everyone on the list in each vote is not mandatory
Maybe a better system would be a combination of both systems. 1-10 is simpler for the voters but gives unequal power in some situations. If however the 1-10 rating list of each user was converted into an equivalent STV preference list this system would have the advantages of both systems. Simple and fair.Full Tablet wrote:
The problem with a system where people people rate maps by 1-10 is that different people have different standards for which value means what (some people would consider "5" average, "7" outstanding, and "10" incredibly good; while some people consider "9" average, and "10" good).
Also, it is prone to abuse: people when they vote, want to maximize their own voting power, so if they think a map deserves a rating of "8", for example, they vote "10" instead to make sure the rating is pushed up (voting "8" would just be a weaker vote).
Instead of a rating system for votes, a better system would make each vote consist of a ranking of candidates from best to worst. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_tr ... te#Example
Threads are a team effort but ill try my best not to postN0thingSpecial wrote:
M3ATL0V3R you're solo carrying this thread to 10 pages
Don't give up!M3ATL0V3R wrote:
Threads are a team effort but ill try my best not to postN0thingSpecial wrote:
M3ATL0V3R you're solo carrying this thread to 10 pages
or maybe he's solo-throwing itN0thingSpecial wrote:
M3ATL0V3R you're solo carrying this thread to 10 pages
N0thingSpecial wrote:
M3ATL0V3R you're solo carrying this thread to 10 pages
Xyrus wrote:
Don't give up!
Thats not wilchq its AmaiHachimitsu who is married to wilchq.[Taiga] wrote:
If even pro player come and mix railey with stinky shit, it must mean something. More, as far as i lurk in Wilchq twitch channel since he started streaming, he is very, i mean very nice person, something really pissed him in this thread.
Oh right, yet Amai is also nice guy, didn't heared from him to be rude and toxic towards other people. One thing what amaze me here about polish community is that top rank elite players from poland are very nice people, unlike other games like lol / csgo where greater amount of top polish players are toxic cunts who waste oxygene.M3ATL0V3R wrote:
Thats not wilchq its AmaiHachimitsu who is married to wilchq.[Taiga] wrote:
If even pro player come and mix railey with stinky shit, it must mean something. More, as far as i lurk in Wilchq twitch channel since he started streaming, he is very, i mean very nice person, something really pissed him in this thread.
Was there ever a good time to exist?winber1 wrote:
it's time to stop existing
back when the 3rd dimension didn't exist yetN0thingSpecial wrote:
Was there ever a good time to exist?winber1 wrote:
it's time to stop existing
Before mankindN0thingSpecial wrote:
Was there ever a good time to exist?winber1 wrote:
it's time to stop existing
There was no quarrel just after the maps have been selected, shit only went down when the top player almost didn't get their way. That is when the hatred started to flourish. Similarly, look of the amount of people that are in favor of voting the Mulholland map in, which is basically a testament for the position that it is in fact not about quality, but only popularity.Endaris wrote:
Agreeing on points is vital part of a discussion, so don't skip it.
I do recall the old OP of the feature request being much shorter indeed. Not going to search that up but I guess we can call the second part of my previous post void.
Iirc the old title clearly targetted gimmicky maps though. It had the keyword "gimmicky" in its title at least.
What you're criticising in this thread is the reaction of players on what the mysterious preselector-dude aka Ephemeral+pals made out of that idea.
As I mentioned at the start of my second post:
There is no particular value in loving those maps when there's nothing special about them. If they're neither special nor good then the entire section holds no particular value. It's just a section of maps that randomly happen to have a scoreboard.
I think a lot of the salt being spread roots in the idea of having a category for gimmicky maps being compromised by the preselector and by holding community votes.
Sure, it's what the preselector-dudes make out of it but I think it's short-sighted to call it insufferable elitism if people like BD just wanted that section to highlight and encourage unrankable quality mapping as probably intended with the initial feature request. The idea was just compromised and even though the reaction is certainly not mature I think someone else is to blame - for compromising the idea while ignoring the arguments against it.
Eraser wrote:
lol
ah damn, it was Amai after all not wilchq. Sorry about that, the namechanges get really confusing sometimes.Endaris wrote:
I wouldn't call that straight up elitism though, rather a lack of self-reflection. Because when people think of elite-mappers they would probably not think of BD but rather of lfj, RLC, fanzhen, Lan Wings and the likes. BD is an attentionwhore after all, he knows that and he should know better.
I think it is very stupid and generalising to call insufferable elitism when a lot of mappers didn't give such lame statements as quoted in your OP. Those are 3 mappers but is that representative of our community? I don't think so.
make this thread an epic smackdown where I pick apart the elitist entitlement, blatant disdain for the tastes of lower ranked players, and generally disgusting attitude that came with the quotes.You're doing a fuckload of interpretation there. There are many questions that have to be asked and "How many people voted that even knew all of the maps?" or "How long was the average time that was used for the mapevaluation and voting decision?" are probably the ones that are the main reason behind the digust of the quoted players regarding the voting's outcome.