1. osu!community
  2. osu!
  3. Development
posted
As some of you may have already heard, a proposal is currently being passed around that outlines several key changes to the BN/QAT designed with the intent to fix some of the long-standing issues with the system. Formed from a composite collection of many people's concerns and suggestions, this proposal (titled as 'the Upheaval') represents potentially the next step in the BN/QAT system going forward.

You may read the current draft by clicking on this link.

This proposal represents the collective changes that (hopefully) you would all like to see. It is not solely 'me' pushing this - these are all concerns and issues raised by others, perhaps even months ago. Understand that these concerns and suggestions come from your fellow participants in the system - not from me.

Summary of what the proposal covers:
  1. Current BN tiering system is dissolved and replaced with a 1-2 month probationary system with provisions for promotion/demotion based on conduct
  2. BN members receive increased acknowledgement via a forum title and some sort of visual identification (currently a purple name a la MAT). This particular point is temporary and will not carry over into the 'moddingv2' version of the Beatmap Nominators.
  3. Long, consistently serving BN will receive a special title which they may choose to wear upon their retirement from the team. This will apply retroactively to all qualifying, currently-retired BN.
  4. The most active BN will be determined every 6 months via a composite consideration of successfully qualified beatmaps and overall modding activity, and will receive the Elite Nominator title plus suitable accolades for their efforts.
  5. Divisions will receive more attention and reworking by members of the QAT to better reflect active participation in them by those who are interested.
  6. QAT will be freed from administrative obligation (regarding busywork and the like) and will be encouraged to check qualified maps of their own volition again. A new reporting system will be linked to the internal QAT channels, allowing them to fill their primary obligation as members of the team - to respond to complaints about improperly qualified maps.
  7. QAT will be encouraged to consider minimalist revisions of the current Ranking Criteria to promote higher quality beatmaps whilst also removing unnecessary roadblocks to alternate mapping styles entering Ranked
  8. The de-facto leadership of the QAT will be determined by applicants expressing their interest, and placing themselves before a combined vote of the BN and QAT. The top two applicants will be considered as the QAT leadership, and will work closely with a member of the osu! team (myself, currently) to see the day-to-day affairs of running the team kept in order, and also to tackle any issues that may arise.


Understand that this is a proposal, and nothing is currently certain in it. It is not a catch-all, fix-everything-at-once measure. Things will require revision and reconsideration should this proposal become reality. The intent is clearly to apply these changes with any extra changes that people may point out during the revision process, and hopefully make things a little better for everyone involved in the system.

Thus, your thoughts on the matter are important.

If you have any thoughts, concerns or opinions on anything listed in the proposal, please post them below in a single-post formatted however you wish. Refrain from commenting on other's opinions or the like for the time being - we'll have an open-ended discussion thread on that at a later date.
posted
Okay, firstly, I'll be summarizing my thoughts (and, hopefully, by extension, the community's feelings).

Let's start with a misconception.

GitHub wrote:

One T2 BN noted that in the process of forcing less experienced BN to only be able to bubble maps coupled with the more experienced T2 BN being pressured to solely qualify, the maps that were receiving the most attention were considerably safer, more uniform maps that may prioritize criteria 'safety' over creative exposition and general enjoyment.

This issue has been going on for years, and is more related to the qualification system as a whole rather than the most recent change, although admittedly the tiering change certainly exacerbated it.

In general, the protests regarding map quality have had nothing to do with map quality in reality, but instead in a perceived (and very real) lack of Variety and Expression. Players and mappers alike will colloquially refer to this as "maps suck nowadays" but they're not talking about the actual quality of the structure or the patterns here.

That said, I'm largely in agreement with much of what's been said in the overview.

Ephemeral, you have really hit the nail on the head when you said that the current ranking system contains people who have lost their fire. Props to you for being the first staff member to publicly recognize that the issues we face are motivational and directional rather than structural.

A more flexible system that allows for more active interplay amongst its members will absolutely be more chaotic and less organized, but you are absolutely right that the one thing the previous MAT/BAT system never lacked was passion. People still care as much as they used to, but they lack the capability of fully expressing themselves due to the nebulous nature of changes - there's no sense of agency at all, anymore.

I can get into the nitty-gritty of each individual idea proposed here, but that would sort of defeat the purpose and in general these things can be discussed much more thoroughly over time than in one big wall of text. I'll avoid doing that.


And... that's it. I can't really say much more here. I'm actually in full agreement with most of this and it's the first time I can remember in my entire history of this game where I say that I think this can really pan out and be an effective step forward. I was really hesitant about your general naunce of being "for democracy and community-driven systems", believing you to have become naive or overestimating the general capabilities of random people, but this is a much more balanced skeleton of a plan than I've ever seen in this game's history.


I'm happy about that.
posted
Woah, this sounds cool
posted
posting in an epic bread

pretty cool stuff, i like it
posted
Oh my god this is awesome ! really good idea
posted
I really like this idea
posted
TLDR: returning to newBAT system of 2014
posted
hej
posted

xxdeathx wrote:

TLDR: returning to newBAT system of 2014

a la MAT,h
posted
sounds lovely
posted
bless
posted
"The most active BN will be determined every 6 months via a composite consideration of successfully qualified beatmaps and overall modding activity, and will receive the Elite Nominator title plus suitable accolades for their efforts."

I feel like this should happen more often than twice a year. 2-3 months sounds more appropriate.
posted

Ephemeral wrote:


[*] QAT will be encouraged to consider minimalist revisions of the current Ranking Criteria to promote higher quality beatmaps whilst also removing unnecessary roadblocks to alternate mapping styles entering Ranked


this is p neato
posted
yes please thank you very much :D
posted
yes we need good mania ranked maps kthx :)
posted
I don't have a real presence in the mapping community but these changes sound good to me :-)
posted

Weber wrote:

"The most active BN will be determined every 6 months via a composite consideration of successfully qualified beatmaps and overall modding activity, and will receive the Elite Nominator title plus suitable accolades for their efforts."

I feel like this should happen more often than twice a year. 2-3 months sounds more appropriate.


Indeed, that would be better I think, and that would encourage BN's to make a "better" work regularly (if I may say so)
posted

Shiirn wrote:

GitHub wrote:

One T2 BN noted that in the process of forcing less experienced BN to only be able to bubble maps coupled with the more experienced T2 BN being pressured to solely qualify, the maps that were receiving the most attention were considerably safer, more uniform maps that may prioritize criteria 'safety' over creative exposition and general enjoyment.

This issue has been going on for years, and is more related to the qualification system as a whole rather than the most recent change, although admittedly the tiering change certainly exacerbated it.

In general, the protests regarding map quality have had nothing to do with map quality in reality, but instead in a perceived (and very real) lack of Variety and Expression. Players and mappers alike will colloquially refer to this as "maps suck nowadays" but they're not talking about the actual quality of the structure or the patterns here.


Want to speak out what i think because mapping vairety matters a lot to me

I think the only people in the end who decide the amount of innovation and creativity that go into the ranking system are the mappers themselves. A map that uses perfectly meta aesthetics, comfortable flow, very safe style, etc, is obviously much easier to rank than something that pushes rc boundaries. So if mappers feel more comfortable mapping in that way from experience then they'll do so, and push those for rank. The thing that will most stop them from pushing experimental types of maps is the boundaries that the ranking system provides- so it does have to do partly with the qualification system, but there can't ever be a perfect system (even though we can come as close as we can). There has to be some sort of quality assurance for ranked maps in the first place.

Removal of tiers will open up a lot of availability for bn mods and therefore qualifications, making it easier to push maps in general. So this availability will probably (and hopefully) give them more confidence to push something more-or- less against the mapping meta :)
posted

Weber wrote:

"The most active BN will be determined every 6 months via a composite consideration of successfully qualified beatmaps and overall modding activity, and will receive the Elite Nominator title plus suitable accolades for their efforts."

I feel like this should happen more often than twice a year. 2-3 months sounds more appropriate.

I agree with weber tbh, I do feel it should be slightly shorter. Perhaps 3 or 4 months, 6 feels a bit too long
posted
I don't really care about these rewards title and stuff, but yeah this draft is definitly a better way to handle map nomination by far.

Hoping we will see this soon in action~
Please login to reply.