* QAT engagement in "controversial" maps, current QAT are too placid and passive
Hmm I do feel that this is something people want more of but in the end, it won't come out the way people would hope it would and it just would leave an undesirable outcome for those who are asking for this
What I mean by this that these people who consider maps controversial (such as my own if i need to put in example) not rankable standards, are low quality,etc is what these people are asking for more discussion and possibly keep away from ranking status which i believe is okay to have more of that and actually would be possibly be benefits for both sides in 1 way or another depending on the take.
But
The consequences of doing such a system would also lead to more discussion on stuff that they truly like and deem "the quality of the game" or whatever exaggerating thing i would put when they have the same amount or worst problems than the maps that consider to be "bad quality" with only differences in terms of the map looks in the eyes.
With that said we see that this type of system easily gets those people all rally up either way just as much as the current but possibly worst when they see that the maps they hate get ranked just as easily as before while the maps they like will be stuck in limbo
Even if possible maps they hate will actually get taken action and the maps they like will also gets locks away to balance out the situation will still leave in undesirable feeling to both sides and possibly more for the people who is asking for such a thing since for the most part, they only want it to happen for things they hate.
Personally whatever happen with this, ill take a neutral stance on since i'm not for or against on a system like this whether that will harm me/others alike or not.
----
fyi what i writing down below is trying to take on the perspective of someone who is mainly seeing the outside of things (just to make a point whether that is a valid 1 or not.)
I am aware there is more possibly going on in the inside that i have not seen/ too aware of but as a person who doesn't have the access to the inside this is mainly what most people see and why people consider the qat as a joke more than half the time.
What I mean by this is that for the most part all i really see is that they only take people who is capable of checking unrankables and obvious subjective things people would more or less agree with (low diff, spread issues, etc) and to me honestly sometimes I don't see that much difference between them as a bn and a qat other than the fact they have a red name and have the power to dq maps.
I do feel the need to say that having more people who is capable of others fields that will help the game/improve more than just the average qah check/dq discussion/etc should be more considered and having more options of getting qat without feeling like you need to have qah as a requirement nowadays (with an exception of those like yuii due to him already proven to have experience enough to do the job.)
If they are doing more than just looking at people's qah status already then possibly be more open about it and actually make it more clear that there is more ways to be qualify than people think so more people who is actually possibly qualify in a field in the qat can more aware and be motivated to possibly show that they have potentially a good candidate that otherwise would had been ignored due to how things is currently (like something about this in maybe in the next qat gazette for people who is actually interested in those things)
For ideas what more fields a qat can do aside from what i see majority of the time is something I would have to think of more myself and I don't have much complains on the current rooster since it has a bunch of needed experienced people capable (to me at least) to be that motivated with this part despite all i said.
This is just me giving an opinion and if I didn't make it clear the 1st time, i'm mostly neutral with everything that will happen.
Hmm I do feel that this is something people want more of but in the end, it won't come out the way people would hope it would and it just would leave an undesirable outcome for those who are asking for this
What I mean by this that these people who consider maps controversial (such as my own if i need to put in example) not rankable standards, are low quality,etc is what these people are asking for more discussion and possibly keep away from ranking status which i believe is okay to have more of that and actually would be possibly be benefits for both sides in 1 way or another depending on the take.
But
The consequences of doing such a system would also lead to more discussion on stuff that they truly like and deem "the quality of the game" or whatever exaggerating thing i would put when they have the same amount or worst problems than the maps that consider to be "bad quality" with only differences in terms of the map looks in the eyes.
With that said we see that this type of system easily gets those people all rally up either way just as much as the current but possibly worst when they see that the maps they hate get ranked just as easily as before while the maps they like will be stuck in limbo
Even if possible maps they hate will actually get taken action and the maps they like will also gets locks away to balance out the situation will still leave in undesirable feeling to both sides and possibly more for the people who is asking for such a thing since for the most part, they only want it to happen for things they hate.
Personally whatever happen with this, ill take a neutral stance on since i'm not for or against on a system like this whether that will harm me/others alike or not.
----
fyi what i writing down below is trying to take on the perspective of someone who is mainly seeing the outside of things (just to make a point whether that is a valid 1 or not.)
I am aware there is more possibly going on in the inside that i have not seen/ too aware of but as a person who doesn't have the access to the inside this is mainly what most people see and why people consider the qat as a joke more than half the time.
What I mean by this is that for the most part all i really see is that they only take people who is capable of checking unrankables and obvious subjective things people would more or less agree with (low diff, spread issues, etc) and to me honestly sometimes I don't see that much difference between them as a bn and a qat other than the fact they have a red name and have the power to dq maps.
I do feel the need to say that having more people who is capable of others fields that will help the game/improve more than just the average qah check/dq discussion/etc should be more considered and having more options of getting qat without feeling like you need to have qah as a requirement nowadays (with an exception of those like yuii due to him already proven to have experience enough to do the job.)
If they are doing more than just looking at people's qah status already then possibly be more open about it and actually make it more clear that there is more ways to be qualify than people think so more people who is actually possibly qualify in a field in the qat can more aware and be motivated to possibly show that they have potentially a good candidate that otherwise would had been ignored due to how things is currently (like something about this in maybe in the next qat gazette for people who is actually interested in those things)
For ideas what more fields a qat can do aside from what i see majority of the time is something I would have to think of more myself and I don't have much complains on the current rooster since it has a bunch of needed experienced people capable (to me at least) to be that motivated with this part despite all i said.
This is just me giving an opinion and if I didn't make it clear the 1st time, i'm mostly neutral with everything that will happen.