1. osu!community
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Beatmap Management
posted
hello cuties,

it came to my attention that we do not know how to deal with insta-qualifies (Qualifying directly, without waiting 24 hours, after a disqualification.) and we need to clear this out once and for all.

I believe there is currently no rule stating how to deal with those and QATs are mostly handling those case by case, leaving a big part of the community to be confused.

I would like to suggest the following:
  1. When a map is disqualified over anything affecting gameplay elements (objects, hitsounds, timing points, settings), it would require a delay of 24 hours between the first and the second nomination.
  2. When a map is disqualified over anything related to metadata (artist, title, difficulty title, source and tags) or storyboard elements, it would not require a delay and we can proceed to an insta-qualify.


I am leaving this for discussion, so feel free to add more information or to give out your opinion on the matter.
For those who do not have access to post here, you can send me a private message and I can transfer your opinion over here.

thanks!
posted
insta qualifies should only be disallowed in cases of extreme remapping, unrankable errors involving file changes (not offscreen sliders or whatnot), diffs being added or removed, etc. not minor gameplay changes like adding missing finishes or whistles. that 24 hour rule stuff just ends up making it more likely someone will yolo it since they might not be available at the right time or whatever. the point of 24 hr rule is to allow for vetoes. but nobody will veto over minor changes like that, only large changes, so the intent of the rule is not affected.
posted
stuff that anyone could potentially find issues with should have the 24h delay
things that no one would have any issues with should be allowed to insta qual

the point of the 24h thing is to make sure other people can see the map to ensure it's correct. if there's no reason for anyone to point stuff out then there's no reason to wait
posted
I'm up with Gabe's idea and Sinnoh's points. Even if they're minor gameplay changes a whole recheck is necessary and some things might be missed.
posted

Kuron-kun wrote:

Even if they're minor gameplay changes a whole recheck is necessary and some things might be missed.
Doing a whole recheck is independant of 24 hr rule. All the 24 hr rule would serve to do in this case is have some wait 24 hr's then renominate from their phone or w/e without actually checking. A map should be good to go after being rechecked without regards to 24 hr for minor stuff.
posted

ailv wrote:

Kuron-kun wrote:

Even if they're minor gameplay changes a whole recheck is necessary and some things might be missed.
Doing a whole recheck is independant of 24 hr rule. All the 24 hr rule would serve to do in this case is have some wait 24 hr's then renominate from their phone or w/e without actually checking. A map should be good to go after being rechecked without regards to 24 hr for minor stuff.
First, it is totally not recommended to nominate a map without checking, which means it requires a check to make sure there is not anything that slept into the mapset by accident.

Second, the reason I am bringing this topic up, is because we do not know what is counted as a "minor" change, and it will be much better if we get to the same path and have a clear definition. In this case, that is why I am suggesting to only insta-requalify when there was something changed for the metadata. Either way, back in mv1, QATs were the only one who would insta-requalify, and not BNs, which is a thing that is happening too often nowadays.
posted
I remember we got it rammed by Loctav that any gameplay-related change is disallowed from insta-qualifications by the logic you just don't qualify a beatmap as single individual.
posted
but on mv2 both nominators are nominating again. i agree in v1 about insta qualifies but through mv2 that isn't an issue. i'll stick with my proposal that the 24 hour limit be needed only for difficulties being added or removed or completely remapped.
posted
i'm fine with gameplay-related change requires delay before nomination, for any dq aside of 1 letter metadata incorrect or missing tags.
posted
If the changes are small, there's no need to wait 24 hours, indeed.

However, like Gabe said, if the changes are quite important, it's better to wait 24 hours, in order to avoid more disqualifications.

In short, I agree with the first post.
posted
Is the point of the 24h rule just to waste time or to give time for people to veto? Wasn't the original purpose of it the latter there? I mean, yeah you can say its good to give 24 hours to make sure more people check it over, but people don't actually just check bubbled maps like that. Getting it in qualified faster actually means people will look at it and find issues. If there's a change to a few sliders it's not going to cause someone to want to veto the map the map.

I don't think it's a huge deal if you have to wait 24h every time there's a gameplay related dq but I think it makes sense if you only have to wait 24 hours if there was a major issue like nao says. the nominators are still checking the maps when they nominate it, it's not like waiting 24 hours will make them somehow check it more intensely.

If a map has changes that would allow the mapper to ignore the 24 hour rule under the current rules after a map has its nomination reset, the map should be allowed to skip the 24 hour delay for requalification in my opinion.
posted
i'm up with Gabe on this!
posted
pretty similar opinion to hobbes and nao

24h rule should only apply after the first nomination on a set, and only apply again if major changes are made, since the point of it should be to let people post whatever issues they have with the map/veto if necessary.

In case of gameplay related things, both people that nominate to requalify should check the map again anyway, regardless of the 24h rule, and if they don't do it without the rule, they also won't do it with rule.
posted
agree with nao+hobbes+lasse
posted
nao's point was pretty good imo
only unrankable issues or extreme remapping/hisounding would need to wait 24 hrs
but some unrankable issues like metadata or single offscreen object etc doesnt rly need to wait imo since its just a small change and doesnt really effect the whole map/set
posted
changing gameplay elements at all should prompt a 24h wait, saying that waiting could be void if a difficulty was remapped will just lead to debates surrounding what counts as “remapped”
whole sections? the entire diff? parts of sections? that’s just unclear

i’m sticking with gabe’s proposal on this one, much easier to understand and much easier to uphold
posted
I think it would be better to let the QAH/QAT who has dqed a certain map or proposed certain issues for this map to decide if the change is minor enough to permit an insta-qualify
Currently we do have some conventions on that (fix metadata = can be insta-qualified etc.) but for other aspects, as people have diverse opinions on what’s a “minor” issue, so I think it would be better to just let concerned QAH/QAT to decide if an insta-qualify is possible (once they think it is/it isn’t possible, they could post in the map’s thread to clarify their reasons)
I think such solution is simpler than making a complete rules
posted
Agree with Gabe's proposal, I think it's reasonable and will give sufficient amount of time, mainly for non BN people who may be involved in discussions or might be interested to leave more feedback.

Tho it might be better to change 'between the first and the second nomination' to 'between the disqualification and the nomination', to not give additional pressure on mapper to care more about nomination timings instead of focusing on changes made, feedback received.
posted
Agree with Lasse, Hobbes, Nao, kwk.
posted
Agree with Lasse, Hobbes and Nao, if its not any major changes I don't really see the point of holding back the set for 24 hours
Please sign in to reply.