To be honest, I'm sick and tired of getting blamed for not being transparent enough towards other members of the modding community. The Pandora's Box opened, so I'm more than grateful to speak out about this proposal and other relevant topics if needed. I don't see necessary to communicate it personally to Ephemeral.
Let me give my humble opinion about the current proposal. I'll try to sort out the things I agree on and viceversa:
Dissolution of the current BN tiering system
The current BN tiering system will be dissolved, and replaced with a probationary system.
New BN will enter the system at this probationary level. We will call it 'T1' just for the sake of familiarity. All existing BN will be promoted to 'full members' (aka, T2) and will be allowed to both qualify and bubble maps at will.
Probationary members will not be permitted to qualify - only to bubble. The probation period will not exceed longer than a 2 month timeframe, with most people ideally out of probation after QAT review after a one month time period.
Full members may be reduced to the probationary level at any time by QAT consensus if their conduct is deemed unacceptable, or they repeatedly make large mistakes or oversights.
Probationary members that prove problematic for whatever reason will be opened up to a QAT consensus vote for dismissal from the BN. This must pass with a significant majority (66%+).
A new BN addition round will begin immediately. The new members will enter at the probationary level.
This was actually discussed in the last meeting we had. It's a great responsability to join the BNG and newcomers should take their time in order to get used to their new function. As a reference when I joined the BAT a few years ago there was a non-written rule that newcomers weren't allowed to icon anything for at least 1 week, so they get used to their new work environment and read up the needed info.
Let me put the cards on the table now. Mao, Nardo and I are currently organising the future BN Applications. Given that making a test for them isn't a thing anymore, it's much easier to plan future cycles more regularly which will probably happen every ~1.5 months alternating all game modes. Taiko/Catch/Mania are already running so the next cycle would be osu!standard only, and so on, making 3-monthly full cycles. I'm all for introducing the trial/probatory period already in this current cycle and end it when the next applications open. That means,
it'd last a bit more than a month to see if a newcomer is suitable for the position or not (more or less what was proposed).
I have to disagree with pishifat's statement though, the probation time should be implemented asap with the current non-standard cycle. I don't see the point in waiting for the next applications to get this done.
All and all, I'm totally fine with this topic.Beatmap Nominator acknowledgement
Full members of the Beatmap Nominators (aka: not probationary members) will once again receive a forum title and the purple name they were once known for in the past.
Probationary members do not receive this until they become a full member.
This is a temporary change and will not be carried over into the new system. Nominators under the new system (new being the automated system referenced in the past) will receive a different form of visual identification, yet to be determined.
This way, people that find BN via the forums will know that purple equals someone that can help. There will be no need to consult tier lists or anything of the sort.
In addition, long-serving BN (>1.5 years) will qualify for a special title which they may choose to have applied to their account when they retire. What this will be is still being considered, but probably something involving community and modding somehow.
The purple color and the usertitle were proposed already like... a year ago or something? I believe it was an almost unanimous consensus but it was turned down by the dev's side back then. Even if the new webpage is under developement, making a tiny change in the old one as this shouldn't be such a fuzz.
I'm also fine with the rest of the statements in here.Beatmap Nominator rewards
The most active BN member every 6 months as determined by a composite consideration of successfully qualified beatmaps and overall modding activity will receive the "Elite Nominator" title permanently, and 6 months of osu! supporter, plus 3 months that they may gift to any of their friends.
This will also be featured as a standalone news announcement complete with social media advertisement.
Other rewards will be considered as time goes on and new systems are announced.
There's currently an active discussion about this topic within the BNs/QATs and opinions are getting gathered. JBH will handle the whereabouts of the modding activity, pondering the factors that might influence on it.
As other people stated in this thread, I'm also kind of sceptical about the impact on the non-standard game modes but I'd rather wait and see how it turns out. Maybe splitting up the standard with the taiko/catch/mania score isn't the only possible solution to this issue, so further discussion would be appreciated.
Apart of that only concern, exceptional BNs should definitely get such reward.Divisions
Divisions will be merged together into larger but separate units based on overall activity, with attention paid to common cooperation and friendships existing between divisions at the moment.
This one is a bit nebulous and may require further consideration.
Some of the divisions were merged already, but it only occured on catch and mania by now. I'd rather wait up until the new BNs come to see if merging some other divisions would be possible.
A few members asked yesterday to be moved into other division because they believe they can work better with X person for whichever reason. I'm not for shuffling all members completely but rather take into consideration these individual concerns, as long as they communicate it to the leader of the correspondant subdivision. People claim for transparency and I claim for fluent and honest communication whenever there's a problem. Without knowing exactly what's wrong, it'd be impossible to look for a solution.
I can see this happening in osu!standard, but not in the near future. I'll stay neutral about it, as the merge already happened within my own division and JBH's.QAT changes
QAT will be no longer barred (or discouraged) from bubbling, qualifying, or vetting qualified maps on their own.
The 'report a map' thread will be closed, and the functionality shifted to a 'report this map' button on the beatmap's web page. These reports will coalesce at certain thresholds within the #qat channel on the osu! internal discord, and all QAT will be expected to review these maps for potential issues as soon as they notice them.
QAT will be encouraged to return to checking qualified maps of their own initiative and interest, and a solution will be made to try to automatically allocated newly qualified maps to certain divisions for checking and approval.
My current idea for this is a Discord bot will notify divisions in their channels when a newly qualified map is assigned to them. I'm open to other ideas.
QAT will also be strongly encouraged to consider minimalist revisions of the current Ranking Criteria to promote higher quality beatmaps while removing unnecessary roadblocks to having alternate mapping styles enter Ranked. They will do so under the leadership of a self-appointed leader(s), explained more below.
Let me be clear about this. QATs were NEVER discouraged or prohibited to actively participate in the ranking process of a beatmap. On the contrary, I'd just quote one of our concepts while joining the QAT:
"QATs, as former members of the BNG, are still allowed to participate in the ranking process of the beatmaps and therefore it's encouraged that you still mod and qualify beatmaps on your own accord."Talking about that "report this map" button thingy, that was another thing that got proposed about a year ago if I recall correctly. The short-term solution should've been the "report a map" thread before such tool could've been implemented, yet it failed to be done by the devs until now. It'd be much easier for modders to report a map with such a tool to avoid in some of the cases being blamed by the mapper and in the worst of the cases getting insulted or alienated for it. I believe anonymity could be a double-edge weapon when this get implemented: You'd get the less confident modders to report a map, but also some trolls that want to harm a mapper or click the button just for the lulz. But hey, we'll be there to filter out the not-so-serious reports!
About checking actively qualified maps like in the past, I can see it happening on non-standard modes since the workload is far smaller than in standard. About the previous statement of allocate newly qualified maps to certain divisions,
I'd like to propose that the qualified map nominated by certain division shall be checked by the same division (eg if Bonsai qualifies a map, Okorin should be notified in this case). That way we'd kill two birds with the same stone: A fairly high amount of qualified maps (if not all) would be revised, and also the subdivision leaders would have a better overview about what their members nominate.
I'm also not sure about what's exactly meant about "alternate mapping styles" getting into Ranked: 2B-like maps? TAG4 maps? Aspire-like maps? How deep should the RC changes to make this happen, taking into account that it's almost totally re-reviewed by the ubkrc? How would those beatmaps impact the osu! program itself? If I recall, Catch proposed while ago introducing multiple objects per beat (double notes, overlapping sliders/spinners, etc) but I remember getting an answer like "it'll break the game" so it got turned down immediately.
In this case, I'd like to get my ideas heard out before their implementation. I'm all for the "report a map" button, redirecting the report directly to the correspondant QAT in order to keep a realistic workload. I'd also like to know how much would this proposal affect the current RC.QAT rewards
Long-standing members of the QAT (>2 years) will receive a profile badge denoting their tenure and marking anything significant they achieved during their time on the team.
They will be afforded a permanent place on the osu! Alumni should they choose to retire. They will also receive osu! supporter equivalent to the length of their service on the team once they retire.
Some of this is already the case, but I figured I'd state it again just to make people aware.
Another topic that got proposed while ago, but just got applied to members that made in a certain period of time an "outstanding contribution" but got turned down to get applied for the "long-standing contributors".
Nothing else to add here, I do agree with it.Returning agency
Should this proposal pass in full, the leadership and direction of the QAT will no longer be determined by a nebulous group of people officiated by the "staff".
The leader(s) will be determined by an expression of interest, followed by a combined vote from both the QAT and the Beatmap Nominators. The top scoring aspirants will be considered the de-facto QAT leadership, though they may number no greater than two.
Before clarifying this further, you must all understand that the BN/QAT system is a system in flux. It has been a standalone 'workaround' to the non-availability of an automated system that is supposed to fully regulate BN appointment automatically, with the QAT designed to fill a literal quality assurance role in that regard. It will change significantly from what it currently is at some point in the near future. When that time is exactly, none of us can say.
The scope of the QAT's leadership will be largely limited to day-to-day affairs and ensuring the smooth addition to and running of the Beatmap Nominators. QAT leadership will be expected to engage with both the Beatmap Nominators and the QAT as a whole, and generally be active and engaged members of the community of their own right.
The QAT leadership will work closely with a member of the osu! team to help them get things going and to provide consul for any systemic changes they may wish to make.
For the time being, that member will be me (Ephemeral). Understand however, that I will not be assuming direct leadership of the QAT under any circumstances bar an absolute necessity. My time has long since passed, and it is well past time for the newer members of the community to begin having their say in the game's future direction.
I'm okay with the idea of getting a leader that can get a direct communication with the higher staff. It's in fact one of my concerns that we could only rely on Loctav/Ephemeral as they work actively with the devs, instead of letting us know beforehand which of the proposals could even get implemented, as most of them would need some coding abilities and/or implementation in the webpage.
I'm also not that happy with the way to choose the leader(s). I can see people agreeing on BN/QAT voting, but my fear is that it ends up being just a pure popularity contest instead of truly choosing someone for their leading abilities. We used to have until then a quasi working environment, even if we're all just volunteers we behave as we are in a job company, and as an in such there is a clear hierarchy High Staff>QATs>BNs and people stick into it. Electing a leader by pure voting would rather killed that purpose and turn the system into a more or less political way. Translocating this proposal into a real example, the leader of the company won't be normally chosen by the members that belong to it, but by a CEO or whoever gets responsible for the personnel management. As this cannot be implemented totally in here, voting should occur. If people disagree that the voting should be solely handled by the QAT, I'm okay to get the BNs into it as well with a certain weightening of the votes in favour to the QAT.
Another point that gives me the creeps is the "automated system that is supposed to fully regulate BN appointment automatically". Well... wouldn't that imply that BNs would be treated as just numbers that contribute towards the beatmap ranking? Which factors would be taken into account: just quantity of mods, or also the quality of it? At which cost should people get into the BNG if their mods are purely consisting in "move to x:340", "fix blanket", "add D", "move to column 1", "add NC", and also the neverending lines of ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ without some kind of manual/human regulation?. Sure the number of ranked beatmaps would flourish, but constructive feedback from the modders would drop drastically and so would the quality of the future beatmaps. You know, I learnt most of what I know about beatmapping after reading such useful mods from great modders. As a beginner a few years ago I respected and learnt from the old MATs/BATs as I considered them as an example to follow. Having an automated system would mostly disregard that concept for the future generation of mappers/modders, which I believe is an insult or a mere trivilisation of something we achieved to build up.
As said, I don't totally disagree with the voting concept of the future leader(s). It'd just need some regulations imo.On the other hand, I'm totally against an automated system to regulate new BNs for the already stated reasons.tl;dr Most of the proposed things were already considered by us since months, yet got turned down to happen or just got ignored. I'm more than happy to see things rolling once again and I hope this proposal gets accepted and not ignored once again. I'd also like to see my concerns taken into consideration before greenlighting it for real.