My proposal applies to the "metadata" section of the ranking criteria.

I believe that all cuts/mixes of songs, official or unofficial, must have this fact specified somwhere which is visible in both osu!direct and the website's beatmap listing.

Why?

It seems to be a common occurence nowadays that songs are being mapped after being cut to a shorter length, whether that be official (a TV size beatmap) or an unofficial cut.

When looking at the beatmap listing either on the website or through osu!direct, the only information visible to the user is the artist, title, source, and some difficulty information. The problem here does not arise for official cuts, as in the ranking criteria it is stated that, for example, a TV-size beatmap should be specified as such in the title, however fan-made works are not included.

This means that many beatmap titles are misleading in that the information that it is a shorter version of a song is left out. Often players do not realise that this is the case until they have already finished playing the beatmap, much to their dismay. This also means that unofficially cut versions have become indistinguishable from full versions of the same song.

Some recent examples of this in ranked beatmaps:
https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/933600 (currently qualified) - this beatmap features an mp3 which is both different to the full length version of the song and the official short version of the song, which means that the metadata is quite misleading, in my opinion. Does this mean that you could cut a second off of the actual TV-size version of the song and use that as an excuse not to include "TV-size" in the title? Does this count as a remix of some kind?

https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/935111 - this beatmap is simply an unofficially cut version with no mention anywhere in the title or tags. As a result, the metadata is indistinguishable from the other ranked mapset which features the full, original version of the song.

(several ranked mapsets of "Harumachi Clover": https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets?q=harumachi%20clover - I seriously do not understand what is going on in this example. Some sets specify "TV-size", some do not, despite being the same length, or different lengths. The metadata here is a complete mess. If i download a map titled "Harumachi Clover (TV Size)", i expect to get a map of length 29 seconds. If i download a map titled "Harumachi Clover", I expect to get a map of length 4:10.

Some previous discussions of this topic have been held on r/osugame and can be found here, to mostly positive reception:
https://redd.it/b0h4k9 (excuse the language)
https://redd.it/bd67gj



Edit 28/08/2019:

cl8n wrote:

If the song is shortened for reasons other than a remix, a cover, or an official cut, it should include `(Cut Ver.)` at the end of its title. This is to clearly signify shortened songs from their full versions. Songs that are insignificantly shortened, songs that are shortened in ways that nearly match their original versions, and songs that are a full loop of a looping track are exempt. A song that has been extended either through looping or slowing down segment(s) should add `(Extended Ver.)` at the end of its title.

After more discussion, a definition for what constitutes a cut 'significant' enough to require the marker. My suggestion:

"An significant cut to a song is a cut which omits at least a single verse, chorus, solo, or movement in the song."

this would be a pretty convenient implementation to the game

I expect people will bring up the fact that mappers can just add 'cut version' or something similar to the tags (which some have already been doing) and that isn't really enough imo.

Surely editing the mp3 in this way constitutes it being a remix, meaning it would be perfectly fine to change the metadata to suit the changes - (cut ver.), (short ver.) or something to that effect

i think necessitating it in tags (cut, shortened, etc), and in description is a minimum standard that should be applied . aside from that i think putting it in title would be fine too but others may have different opinions.

Nao Tomori wrote:

i think necessitating it in tags (cut, shortened, etc), and in description is a minimum standard that should be applied . aside from that i think putting it in title would be fine too but others may have different opinions.

as an absolute minimum sure but the bigger problem can be seen here:


this information needs to be in the title

helix wrote:

I expect people will bring up the fact that mappers can just add 'cut version' or something similar to the tags (which some have already been doing) and that isn't really enough imo.

Surely editing the mp3 in this way constitutes it being a remix, meaning it would be perfectly fine to change the metadata to suit the changes - (cut ver.), (short ver.) or something to that effect

While under the ranking criteria, if you boil the meaning of a remix down, it could be argued that a cut version is just a remix, but I don't think that it would be an accurate description as to what has been changed.

To me, a remix takes an existing song and alters it to create a new piece of music, and I wouldn't describe a song that has been remixed to remove parts of a song as a remix.

For example, if we take three map sets of Gold Dust:
https://osu.ppy.sh/b/96006 - DJ Fresh - Gold Dust by galvenize
https://osu.ppy.sh/b/163897 - DJ Fresh - Gold Dust (Sonic Entropy Remix) by galvenize
https://osu.ppy.sh/b/1963417 - DJ Fresh - Gold Dust by Sotarks

The first two use the correct titles for their versions of the song.
The third version, on the other hand, uses the same title as the full version of the song despite being cut down nor has it been remixed by the mapper in any way to add a new creative take on the song.

While the wording of an addition to the title could take form in several different ways (Cut, Edited, Alternative/Alt, Shortened/Short) the lack of anything is frustrating as it doesn't clearly describe what the song is.

Definitely agree that if something is cut, at the very least include it in tags. (Cut, short, etc) but it would also be nice if (Short Ver.) or (Cut Ver.) was also included in the title field. Although, I feel like this would be weird to force onto many songs since people would be required to check if there was a longer version than whatever was mapped (From a modding PoV) and it would also require a definition as to what is cut/remixed/whatever depending on the criteria of the marker.

While I think the idea is good, making a mandatory marker just seems confusing as to what is genuinely cut or not.

eiri- wrote:

Definitely agree that if something is cut, at the very least include it in tags. (Cut, short, etc)

Tags are not shown on osu!direct, nor the beatmap listing or the song selection screen. I would say this is the main issue this thread is trying to combat.

eiri- wrote:

Although, I feel like this would be weird to force onto many songs since people would be required to check if there was a longer version than whatever was mapped (From a modding PoV)

When the mapper provides the metadata for verification during the ranking process, it should be clear whether the version they have mapped is an official mp3 or not. I'm sure checking this would take no more than one minute.

eiri- wrote:

and it would also require a definition as to what is cut/remixed/whatever depending on the criteria of the marker.

Seems pretty simple to me - if it's not one of the officially released lengths of the song (usually either full size or tv-size/short ver) then it is going to be a cut version of some description.

I realise at the moment that an official consensus on what the convention should be for the phrasing of the metadata for a fan-made cut version of a song has not been discussed.

May I suggest, if this information is to go in the title, for the phrasing to be "Shortened ver."? It implies that it is unofficial as opposed to just saying "Short ver." and gets the message across nicely.

Anyone else?

I doubt most people would notice the difference between Short Ver and Shortened Ver. Another issue is that the title field DOES have a limit and making required additions to a title too long can go over the limit in some cases (81 characters) so it's best to keep such things concise while still being clear.

(Cut Ver.) could work well enough.
It's modifying the metadata to the same extent the song is being modified, and if users feel like it'd be beneficial to browsing maps as expressed in the reddit threads.. then yeah. Sounds ok.

The main issues are as eiri- has written but shouldn't be too big of a concern for most cases as song length is usually easily identified when finding metadata. Also https://osu.ppy.sh/community/forums/topics/917229 will probably need defining of what is or isn't considered a cut too, so this and that thread go hand in hand.


Also, about harumachi clover example listed. This case is because it is currently impossible to retroactively change map metadata.
TV Size harumachi clovers ranked after last year's metadata changes have the standardized tags, while those from before the rule changes do not. Maps ranked before a (Cut Ver.) rule is added would still not have the label, unless osu's set-up changes in a way to make those changes possible after rank.

Noffy wrote:

Also, about harumachi clover example listed. This case is because it is currently impossible to retroactively change map metadata.
TV Size harumachi clovers ranked after last year's metadata changes have the standardized tags, while those from before the rule changes do not. Maps ranked before a (Cut Ver.) rule is added would still not have the label, unless osu's set-up changes in a way to make those changes possible after rank.

Thanks for the clarification, I didn't know about last year's change. Of course I'm not concerned with past maps not being updated, that has been a fact in all of osu!'s history that previously ranked maps cannot be altered.

"(Cut ver.)" is an even better suggestion then if we're worrying about title length. Thanks! It still gets the same message across, in my opinion.

Noffy wrote:

The main issues are as eiri- has written but shouldn't be too big of a concern for most cases as song length is usually easily identified when finding metadata. Also https://osu.ppy.sh/community/forums/topics/917229 will probably need defining of what is or isn't considered a cut too, so this and that thread go hand in hand.

Just thought I'd add something and reply to this bit - I feel that a cut would be defined as a version of a song that is not already an official release (such as full version, tv size, or cut version from a video game with official metadata). It's already pretty obvious from the rest of the thread why the alternative is a problem so I won't go on

Taking your guys' advice into consideration I've edited the OP to more consisely phrase my proposition. Hopefully it's ready!

i don't have much opinion on this proposal, so i'm gonna run it by all bn/nat members to see what they think. hopefully we'll be able to reach a conclusion in a few days

Don’t think it’s necessary to be included into the title (tags would be fine) but not opposed to it if it happens

I would agree with Nao, using tags to inform about if it’s cut or not + description should be enough to not mess too much with the current metadata system.

to be clear i also think putting it in title is good

I don't think it's super convenient to have a rule that says like "oh you must use (Short Ver.) if a song has it in it's title" but then add (Cut Ver.) just to mess things up for the ppl checking it. If anything, a way to merge those two would be better than just adding one more marker. I don't think being an official cut or not is that benefitial to know from a player's perspective, as in the end they are trying to show something extremely similar

Trynna wrote:

I don't think it's super convenient to have a rule that says like "oh you must use (Short Ver.) if a song has it in it's title" but then add (Cut Ver.) just to mess things up for the ppl checking it. If anything, a way to merge those two would be better than just adding one more marker. I don't think being an official cut or not is that benefitial to know from a player's perspective, as in the end they are trying to show something extremely similar

if implemented, the merged marker described here is how i'd do it

Nozhomi wrote:

I would agree with Nao, using tags to inform about if it’s cut or not + description should be enough to not mess too much with the current metadata system.

The point of my proposal is to have the information in the title though, to avoid this:


I don't see what good putting it in the tags will do. It doesn't address the issue at all.

dong wrote:

I believe that all cuts/mixes of songs, official or unofficial, must have this fact specified somewhere which is visible in both osu!direct and the website's beatmap listing.

dong wrote:

My proposition is that any beatmap featuring an unofficial cut of a song should specify so in the title using the term "(Cut ver.)".

i don't know what would be your proposal, but there's a small logic problem in the first one so the second one is better.

for the first one, one case can be the very first version of a song is "full ver", like nearly all rhythm game songs, their first version is the original one while their "full ver" are actually called "extended ver", "original mix" etc. so in that case, players would like to see the shorter (original) version while downloading those rhythm game songs so adding a cut ver after those shorter songs shows disrespect to the artist and also conflict with the initial point with that proposal (well standardize tv size/short ver/game ver is also disrespectful but that's another story)
the second one is more reasonable since it divides the "propose of the artist" and "propose of the fan-made" better and respect the artist to some extent.

from my pov the wording of this rule can be a little bit generalized (not limited in cut ver or remix ver), like:
For any beatmaps that use an unofficial edited version of a song, it must be clarified in the song title field that this song is an unofficial edited version. This can avoid misleading while downloading a beatmap and ensure that players would have exactly the song they want.

-

side note, @metadata people: if we can remove those rules that standardize tv size/short ver/game ver and apply the rule above instead (or change to "you must add tv size/short ver/game ver in tags" or something), i guess it'd be better since it's the artist who decides how their song title would be like, and it sounds really unright that an original "-TV Ver.-" song must be written as (TV Size) in a rhythm game that still has many copyright problems unsolved.

Tbh i totally agree with this, it's not that complex to add a "(Cut Ver.)" and not everyone manually cuts songs for it... only a few people often does this so it's not like it will be very common to be confused if should be used "cut"/"tv size"/"short ver." since their usage is pretty easy to understand and it would make titles of songs a lot less missleading, maybe a few people might need to get used but I really think it's not that confusing since it's usage is quite straightfoward

it seems like a good idea but at the same time i dont want to add CUT VERSION to all of the zts tracks that are basically looped for 9 minutes
https://old.ppy.sh/s/889315 this for example is a cut and doesn't suffer from it anyhow and i dont think people need to know its a cut

imo i really agree with this but for the case when the song is actually extended, it is just misleading cuz a cut often meant shorter version of the song, not a longer official tv size ver

the case i'm actually talking about is when you cut a full ver into a tv size but with extra parts of the song like https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/775766#osu/1630299 or https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/745312#osu/1571309

also for non-anime songs it would be super weird imo

realy0_ wrote:

imo i really agree with this but for the case when the song is actually extended, it is just misleading cuz a cut often meant shorter version of the song, not a longer official tv size ver

the case i'm actually talking about is when you cut a full ver into a tv size but with extra parts of the song like https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/775766#osu/1630299 or https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/745312#osu/1571309

also for non-anime songs it would be super weird imo

These are the cases I am talking about where this distinction is necessary, yes. What makes a non-anime song weird here? Have you seen Sotarks' Gold Dust mapset, for example? Why would the distinction be necessary for your examples but not a 'non-anime song'?

Mirash wrote:

it seems like a good idea but at the same time i dont want to add CUT VERSION to all of the zts tracks that are basically looped for 9 minutes

https://old.ppy.sh/s/889315 this for example is a cut and doesn't suffer from it anyhow and i dont think people need to know its a cut

Isn't this song from a video game? Of course the track is gonna be looped. Cutting a looped song is expected, see, for example, any Pokémon or Undertale BGM map.

well the idea is that this wouldn't distinguish between them. i think you could add an exception for looped songs so it wouldn't be needed there for example.

I personally prefer to see clean title. so It's not necessarily thing for me, so kinda close to 'convenience option' but image examples are actually persuasive. so It would be better If display them on the title when considering the convenience and necessity of the community

dong wrote:

realy0_ wrote:

imo i really agree with this but for the case when the song is actually extended, it is just misleading cuz a cut often meant shorter version of the song, not a longer official tv size ver

the case i'm actually talking about is when you cut a full ver into a tv size but with extra parts of the song like https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/775766#osu/1630299 or https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/745312#osu/1571309

also for non-anime songs it would be super weird imo

These are the cases I am talking about where this distinction is necessary, yes. What makes a non-anime song weird here? Have you seen Sotarks' Gold Dust mapset, for example? Why would the distinction be necessary for your examples but not a 'non-anime song'?

i said it would be super weird for non-anime song cuz i (and most people) would just not be used to see the (cut ver.) in the title if it was applied just right now

i mostly agree with adding it to the title since it wouldn't be hard to tell since bns source the metadata when they mod anyway, but the rule should definitely be worded in a way to indicate only on larger cuts just so if some one only cuts off a few seconds off the end it wouldn't need the (Cut Ver.) marker. it would also prevent confusion since i'm sure there are some official releases that are a few seconds shorter than some others (im sure they exist out there none on the top of my head currently)

I can somewhat relate to what eiri said but I don't think it's a bad idea, if the goal is to distinguish the full versions from cuts. If it's only a few seconds off the end you could just add "Songs that are unofficially and significantly shortened by their mappers [...]" (although i can already feel the question "but how significant" arising from that)

I notice that this discussion is currently happening: https://osu.ppy.sh/community/forums/topics/917229
A definition of a "cut" has been suggested in this thread as follows:

glossygloss wrote:

Cut: A song file that has had a portion of audio removed to shorten the beatmapset's play time.

Well, going by this definition, if a song that loops (such as a BGM like an Undertale, Pokémon or zts track as previously mentioned) is cut, does that count as removing a portion of audio? I think if a song loops indefinitely then an exception can be made so long as a cut is not made part-way through a loop.

Touching again though on what Ryuusei Aika said though, as I don't think I responded properly:

Ryuusei Aika wrote:

one case can be the very first version of a song is "full ver", like nearly all rhythm game songs, their first version is the original one while their "full ver" are actually called "extended ver", "original mix" etc. so in that case, players would like to see the shorter (original) version while downloading those rhythm game songs so adding a cut ver after those shorter songs shows disrespect to the artist and also conflict with the initial point with that proposal (well standardize tv size/short ver/game ver is also disrespectful but that's another story)
the second one is more reasonable since it divides the "propose of the artist" and "propose of the fan-made" better and respect the artist to some extent.

In this case, the shorter version is the original version, so no metadata changes need to be made - the cut ver. marker should not be added - and the extended ver. is as expected the version with the extended ver. marker. I think that each different version of a track should be distinguished starting from the original version of the song. If an artist makes a new version of the same song, whether shortened or extended, without their own marker in the official metadata, it should then be added based on which version is the original version.

apparently the rc vote concluded at some point and has results on the bn website

pishifat wrote:

i don't have much opinion on this proposal, so i'm gonna run it by all bn/nat members to see what they think. hopefully we'll be able to reach a conclusion in a few days

59 "Agree" votes (62%)
24 "Neutral" votes (25%)
12 "Disagree" votes (13%)

95 BN/NAT members voted out of a current total ~110 (not sure exactly how many as BNs have joined/left since the vote took place)

Would need someone like pishifat to do additional vote breakdowns if needed.

Seeing as the majority is in favor of adding this rule, we should try to work out wording to apply it to rc. Which is the hard part because people can get confused and break stuff if the wording isn't perfect and concise.

I ask people please play devil's advocate and imagine how the following can be loophole'd or stretched or messed with before it's potentially applied to the live RC. Writing this stuff isn't my biggest strength as I've learned in previous endeavors.

would need to be a guideline due to having exceptions.

Proposal wrote:

If the song is an unofficial cut that is not made that way for a remix or cover, it should include (Cut Ver.) at the end of the current title string. This is to easily distinguish shortened versions of songs from their full length counterparts. Exceptions are if a song is only slightly shortened where musical sections match the original song, or if the cut is (a) full loop(s) from a looping track.

- any cuts of original song that aren't official are cut versions.
- if someone makes a cover and it's a short version of the song. that's considered the original length and doesn't use cut ver tagging.
------ yes people can abuse this to make their own covers to evade the rule. dunno how to close that loophole if that's even possible.
- if the cut is so slight that musical sections still match and length is generally the same, it wouldn't get the tag.
- wording for looped song exception feels clunky but idk how to word it better right now

could potentially also use (Short Ver.) instead of (Cut Ver.) so there's fewer different tags running around. However I can't imagine how to merge it with the current short ver. tag rule as one is for officially labelled cuts and this is for unofficial unlabelled cuts. Determining which track length is the original between short/extended versions, especially from rhythm games, can often be ambiguous due to the age or obscurity of the information: hard to find, need to use web archive to check websites, etc.

i wonder how this would be applied to cases where you use a unoffical extended mp3 ? do you have to put a (Cut Ver.) in the second map if it doesn't follow this ? "This is to easily distinguish shortened versions of songs from their full length counterparts."

https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/514204#osu/1092402
(official)
https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/515939#osu/1095534
(unofficial extension)

i don't think additional voting breakdown is necessary since this change applies to everyone equally. would be cool to see more people who disagreed saying why they disagree though -- only one person who voted that way spoke here, saying that they think tags are enough to get the idea across. that said, i think going ahead with implementation is ok

how i'd word it based on noffy's version above:

If the song is shortened for reasons other than a remix, a cover, or an official cut, it should include (Short Ver.) at the end of its title. This is to clearly signify shortened songs from their full versions. Songs that are insignificantly shortened, songs that are shortened in ways that nearly match their original versions, and songs that are a full loop of a looping track are exempt.

i agree with all the bullet points noffy listed (and consider the covers "loophole" fine). i also think using short ver is better than cut ver since they mean the same thing to players + official cuts that don't use short ver metadata won't have it forced

The reason why this proposal was made is that the length of the map isn't visible when downloading it on the website or in osu!direct. I think a better solution for that would be to add the map length on those pages in order to make cut versions distinguishable instead of changing the metadata rules so much again. Besides, if you click on a map on the website, you actually see if it's shorter so I don't think it's a huge issue.
The problem about this is that it still wouldn't differentiate between different cut lenghts. A 30 second cut and a 2:30 cut would have the same exact title which would still be misleading.
Also, the reason why the (Short Ver.) marker wasn't enforced on all game size maps (like TV Size for anime openings) is that it would affect a large number of maps and it would make things even more complicated so it wouldn't make much sense to enforce (Cut Ver.) on so many maps.
And I think someone already mentioned this earlier but in some cases it's actually really hard to find out how long the original song is unless you buy the single/album somewhere, and it could be confusing if a song was released with different lengths without indicating short/full version, this has actually happened to me on some of my maps.

realy0_ wrote:

i wonder how this would be applied to cases where you use a unoffical extended mp3 ? do you have to put a (Cut Ver.) in the second map if it doesn't follow this ? "This is to easily distinguish shortened versions of songs from their full length counterparts."

https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/514204#osu/1092402
(official)
https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/515939#osu/1095534
(unofficial extension)

then it is an "Extended ver."..?

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

The problem about this is that it still wouldn't differentiate between different cut lenghts. A 30 second cut and a 2:30 cut would have the same exact title which would still be misleading.

The problem is differentiating between the official length of the song and any cut version. If I download a beatmap without any indication that it differs from the official, original version of the song, I expect it to be the official, original version of the song. If the marker is added then I at least know which map is the official length and which have been 'butchered'. Differentiating between a million different varieties of 'cut version' is unimportant.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

Also, the reason why the (Short Ver.) marker wasn't enforced on all game size maps (like TV Size for anime openings) is that it would affect a large number of maps and it would make things even more complicated so it wouldn't make much sense to enforce (Cut Ver.) on so many maps.

This point is moot because why let a problem persist just because it has existed for years? Progress means progress. I was previously unaware that 'TV Size' markers weren't required for official TV Size cuts. If that's the case, that is unequivocably stupid.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

And I think someone already mentioned this earlier but in some cases it's actually really hard to find out how long the original song is unless you buy the single/album somewhere, and it could be confusing if a song was released with different lengths without indicating short/full version, this has actually happened to me on some of my maps.

You should know if you cut an mp3 yourself first of all, but this just boils down to whether or not you even care about having proper metadata, which the ranking criteria definitely should. If the artist themselves doesn't specify in the official metadata then the earliest released version of the track should not have a marker, and those shorter and longer than the original release should use the unofficial markers discussed in this thread, in my opinion. If it's just 'hard to find out', then just do the research.

dong wrote:

realy0_ wrote:

i wonder how this would be applied to cases where you use a unoffical extended mp3 ? do you have to put a (Cut Ver.) in the second map if it doesn't follow this ? "This is to easily distinguish shortened versions of songs from their full length counterparts."

https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/514204#osu/1092402
(official)
https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/515939#osu/1095534
(unofficial extension)

then it is an "Extended ver."..?

so then it has to be precised in the purposal or else people would be confused

realy0_ wrote:

so then it has to be precised in the purposal or else people would be confused

ok, i will make an amendment

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

The problem about this is that it still wouldn't differentiate between different cut lenghts. A 30 second cut and a 2:30 cut would have the same exact title which would still be misleading.

dong wrote:

The problem is differentiating between the official length of the song and any cut version. If I download a beatmap without any indication that it differs from the official, original version of the song, I expect it to be the official, original version of the song. If the marker is added then I at least know which map is the official length and which have been 'butchered'. Differentiating between a million different varieties of 'cut version' is unimportant.

As I said, this problem can easily be solved by simply adding information about the map length in osu!direct/on the website or by clicking on the map

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

Also, the reason why the (Short Ver.) marker wasn't enforced on all game size maps (like TV Size for anime openings) is that it would affect a large number of maps and it would make things even more complicated so it wouldn't make much sense to enforce (Cut Ver.) on so many maps.

dong wrote:

This point is moot because why let a problem persist just because it has existed for years? Progress means progress. I was previously unaware that 'TV Size' markers weren't required for official TV Size cuts. If that's the case, that is unequivocably stupid.

I wouldn't say it is, these standardization rules are supposed to be somewhat consistent with each other, meaning that if (Cut Ver.) is enforced on all maps, the same thing would have to be done with (Short Ver.) but apparently it has already been decided that (Short Ver.) shouldn't be enforced. I also don't consider it a problem like you say. Before the standardization rules existed, the metadata wasn't wrong, just handled differently. Standardization doesn't necessarily equal progress.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

And I think someone already mentioned this earlier but in some cases it's actually really hard to find out how long the original song is unless you buy the single/album somewhere, and it could be confusing if a song was released with different lengths without indicating short/full version, this has actually happened to me on some of my maps.

dong wrote:

You should know if you cut an mp3 yourself first of all, but this just boils down to whether or not you even care about having proper metadata, which the ranking criteria definitely should. If the artist themselves doesn't specify in the official metadata then the earliest released version of the track should not have a marker, and those shorter and longer than the original release should use the unofficial markers discussed in this thread, in my opinion. If it's just 'hard to find out', then just do the research.

Yes you usually know if you cut an mp3 but BNs also need to check the metadata which means they have to find out whether it's a cut or not. Also, some people just take mp3s from other maps so they wouldn't know if it's cut or not. Regarding the different versions of the same song, sometimes they are released at the same time or the release date is unknown. And "just doing the research" is not really possible if no information is available at all.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

As I said, this problem can easily be solved by simply adding information about the map length in osu!direct/on the website or by clicking on the map

Sure, but how would you know the length specified in osu!direct/the site isn't the length of the official release? You would either have to search for the length of other ranked maps or scour the internet for metadata which you state later on in the post might be impossible.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

Yes you usually know if you cut an mp3 but BNs also need to check the metadata which means they have to find out whether it's a cut or not. Also, some people just take mp3s from other maps so they wouldn't know if it's cut or not. Regarding the different versions of the same song, sometimes they are released at the same time or the release date is unknown. And "just doing the research" is not really possible if no information is available at all.

Speaking as someone whose interest in the issue stems outside of rhythm games, there are very few cases where the source metadata are not available somewhere online; even if it's not, you can usually find the length of the full version by searching for it on a video site such as YouTube or niconico. If you're re-using an mp3 from another set, then there will be a link back to the original metadata which usually contains the length. If you have sourced the mp3 from somewhere else online, then there will almost definitely be metadata on it.

I can see you're personally invested in this issue because 3/4 of your ranked maps are cut significantly from the official versions (presumably to match the length of the TV-size versions) with no indication there's actually a longer version available. Looking at this from the perspective of a player, as I mentioned earlier, if they play a shortened version of a map they may not look for other versions of the song since they may think this is the only officially released length.

If I'm not being succinct enough, in my opinion, this change is not only important for the players in the sense that they get the best gameplay experience, but also for ensuring the quality of the metadata in the ranked section.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

As I said, this problem can easily be solved by simply adding information about the map length in osu!direct/on the website or by clicking on the map

helix wrote:

Sure, but how would you know the length specified in osu!direct/the site isn't the length of the official release? You would either have to search for the length of other ranked maps or scour the internet for metadata which you state later on in the post might be impossible.

Adding (Cut Ver.) to every second map kinda goes against the idea of "Do not modify the metadata an artist provides on official sources unless said modification is done in order to comply with formatting and standardisation rules on this Ranking Criteria." Even if this falls under the exceptions, the rule would become pointless because contrary to (TV Size) and (Short Ver.), this one is an artificial marker which changes the metadata of the map. The (Cut Ver.) marker doesn't exist in the official metadata, but TV Size and Short Ver are common in official sources, so enforcing those make sense for standardization purposes, however this one doesn't.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

Yes you usually know if you cut an mp3 but BNs also need to check the metadata which means they have to find out whether it's a cut or not. Also, some people just take mp3s from other maps so they wouldn't know if it's cut or not. Regarding the different versions of the same song, sometimes they are released at the same time or the release date is unknown. And "just doing the research" is not really possible if no information is available at all.

helix wrote:

Speaking as someone whose interest in the issue stems outside of rhythm games, there are very few cases where the source metadata are not available somewhere online; even if it's not, you can usually find the length of the full version by searching for it on a video site such as YouTube or niconico. If you're re-using an mp3 from another set, then there will be a link back to the original metadata which usually contains the length. If you have sourced the mp3 from somewhere else online, then there will almost definitely be metadata on it.

Like I said, some songs are not available on platforms such as YouTube or niconico, you have to buy them or find a sketchy website with pirated music if you're lucky. As for taking the mp3 from another map, it's not true that the map always contains a metadata link. This usually only happens on ranked maps, pending and graveyarded maps often don't have that. And a lot of older ranked maps don't have it either because the metadata rules were less strict some years ago.

helix wrote:

I can see you're personally invested in this issue because 3/4 of your ranked maps are cut significantly from the official versions (presumably to match the length of the TV-size versions) with no indication there's actually a longer version available. Looking at this from the perspective of a player, as I mentioned earlier, if they play a shortened version of a map they may not look for other versions of the song since they may think this is the only officially released length.

If I'm not being succinct enough, in my opinion, this change is not only important for the players in the sense that they get the best gameplay experience, but also for ensuring the quality of the metadata in the ranked section.

I don't really understand the need to be informed about the length of the original song. You said "if they play a shortened version of a map they may not look for other versions of the song since they may think this is the only officially released length" but if someone wants to look up the song of a map they played, they will do so regardless of map length, and then they will probably find the full version themselves.
And since you brought it up, one of my ranked maps is of a song where the official YouTube upload is 2:41 long, however if you buy the song it's like 3 or 4 minutes, I don't remember exactly. Anyways, both have no information about short/full version so you'd think that the 2:41 version is actually the full one

ok, i'm not here to change your mind since a vote was already cast with the majority in favour, but i respectfully disagree. we should focus on wording this the best we can.

dong wrote:

ok, i'm not here to change your mind since a vote was already cast with the majority in favour, but i respectfully disagree. we should focus on wording this the best we can.

You can obviously disagree with me but I expect you to at least provide some counterarguments so we can discuss the issue properly.
Deciding whether this proposal is being implemented or not based on a vote where only BNs and NATs can participate is unreasonable because many of them are either not involved in metadata affairs, don't care about them or are simply not affected by this change because they don't cut songs. The vote also excludes every user who is not part of these usergroups which is kinda unfair because everyone's opinion should matter equally. Plus, the number of people agreeing with something does not necessarily mean that it's the best option.

I'll summarize my previous concerns and add some new ones I thought about so it's easier to reply:
1) Using (Short Ver.) as pishi suggested is not a good idea in any case because it would not differentiate between an official and an unofficial cut. For example, if someone cuts an Eroge song to 2:30, it would have the same title as the official opening (let's say around 1:30) if it already has the marker in the metadata. Since this was your main reason to make this proposal, it wouldn't work out well.
2) Unlike (Short Ver.) and (TV Size), the (Cut Ver.) marker doesn't really exist in official sources so enforcing it onto many maps would be a significant alteration of the original metadata and that goes against the RC rule which states that it shouldn't be changed with additional markers, if you consider that cutting a song doesn't change it in any way except for its length.
3) A song can be cut in many different ways and different lengths so if someone makes a 1 minute cut of a song, it would still have the same title as a 3 minute cut. This can be an even bigger problem if a song consists of parts which sound very different from each other. Some known examples for this are https://osu.ppy.sh/s/823960 and https://osu.ppy.sh/s/456366 but there are actually many songs with such a contrast (mostly electronic songs with a calm intro/outro and very heavy drops). Cutting the song in a way that makes only one part of the song remain would make the Cut Ver. marker apply, but if someone else cut the other part, it would get the marker as well despite being completely different.
4) What if someone cuts a song but extends it at the same time? Like, if one part of a song is removed but a different part that happens to be longer is being looped, it would be both a cut and an extension at the same time. I'm not sure if this has been done before but considering all the audio edits people have done in order to go around song length limits (adding R3 Music Box, looping parts of the song several times, putting 2 songs together etc.), this would be a viable possibility.
5) If a song has a long outro (more than 20%) which the mapper doesn't want to map, they would have to cut it for the sake of rankability, but then they would have to add (Cut Ver.) to the title despite basically mapping the full song.
6) There would be more metadata related things to check for BNs and QAH (a lot of them don't check the metadata in the first place) and it could be confusing if there are different versions of the same song or if the mapper made a minor cut which isn't noticeable right away.
7) Having this marker on a big portion of ranked maps simply looks bad and it would be even worse for songs that have (Sped Up Ver.) or (Nightcore Mix) in the title because most of them are cuts so those would have 2 markers next to each other and that looks horrible

Thanks for summarizing your arguments.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

1) Using (Short Ver.) as pishi suggested is not a good idea in any case because it would not differentiate between an official and an unofficial cut. For example, if someone cuts an Eroge song to 2:30, it would have the same title as the official opening (let's say around 1:30) if it already has the marker in the metadata. Since this was your main reason to make this proposal, it wouldn't work out well.

Fine, then "Short" should not be the wording. "Cut ver." may still be in use in official metadata, but I would presume it is much less common, therefore it better differentiates between an official and an unofficial cut.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

2) Unlike (Short Ver.) and (TV Size), the (Cut Ver.) marker doesn't really exist in official sources so enforcing it onto many maps would be a significant alteration of the original metadata which goes against the RC rule which states that it shouldn't be changed with additional markers considering that cutting a song doesn't change it in any way except for its length.

That's the entire point of my proposal - that cutting a song should be a siginificant enough change to warrant an additional marker.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

3) A song can be cut in many different ways and different lengths so if someone makes a 1 minute cut of a song, it would still have the same title as a 3 minute cut. This can be an even bigger problem if a song consists of parts which sound very different from each other. Some known examples for this are https://osu.ppy.sh/s/823960 and https://osu.ppy.sh/s/456366 but there are actually many songs with such a contrast (mostly electronic songs with a calm intro/outro and very heavy drops). Cutting the song in a way that makes only one part of the song remain would get the Cut Ver. marker, but if someone else cut the other part, it would get the marker as well despite being completely different.

Both a 1 minute cut and 3 minute cut are unofficial cuts, and the official mp3 should take precedence when working out metdata in this case. I don't see a problem with having this distinction for both of these cases, because if someone is downloading a map with a "Cut ver." marker, they know that some amount of the song has been cut in comparison to any official cut. It simply exists to better inform the player about what it is they are downloading.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

4) What if someone cuts a song but extends it at the same time? Like, if one part of a song is removed but a different part that happens to be longer is being looped, it would be both a cut and an extension at the same time. I'm not sure if this has been done before but considering all the audio file edits people have done in order to go around song length limits (adding R3 Music Box, looping parts of the song several times, putting 2 songs together etc.), this would be a viable possibility.

Would this fall under a remix? If you're adding an R3 Music Box section, that information is already in the metadata, as can be seen in this map for example. If parts of the same song are looped without cutting any other parts out, that's an extension. I believe this should also be reflected in the metadata the same way i believe "Cut ver." should be. If parts are both cut and looped, well, you're mapping a frankenstein's monster - I guess it's a remix. How often does this happen? It's definitely not the same song at that point, you're telling me that shouldn't be reflected in the metadata upfront? That's even more serious that my initial problem. There is also already a guideline against this in the RC. It's a guideline, but that means the case should be less than common.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

5) If a song has a long outro (more than 20%) which the mapper doesn't want to map, they would have to cut it for the sake of rankability, but then they would have to add (Cut Ver.) to the title despite basically mapping the full song.

er, yes, this is a Cut ver. You have removed a part of the song from the mp3, outro or not. If it's 20% of the song, I'd say that's pretty significant, too. Whether or not "not mapping this intro/outro" constitutes "basically mapping the full song" is subjective, but I disagree.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

6) There would be more metadata related things to check for BNs and QAH and it could be confusing if there are different versions of the same song or if the mapper made a minor cut which isn't noticeable right away.

That's their job. I don't really think this is much of an argument. Things will slip through the cracks, maybe. Doesn't this happen with every rule?

dong wrote:

Thanks for summarizing your arguments.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

2) Unlike (Short Ver.) and (TV Size), the (Cut Ver.) marker doesn't really exist in official sources so enforcing it onto many maps would be a significant alteration of the original metadata which goes against the RC rule which states that it shouldn't be changed with additional markers considering that cutting a song doesn't change it in any way except for its length.

dong wrote:

That's the entire point of my proposal - that cutting a song should be a siginificant enough change to warrant an additional marker.

Yes, but it's not reasonable because you are changing the metadata of the song without changing the song. That's like saying the metadata needs to be changed because someone didn't map the intro or outro of the song. If someone does that, they are also removing a part of the song from the map, yet the metadata remains the same. The distinction between unofficial and official cuts is not as important as you think because many unofficial cuts sound very similar to official ones and reflect the song well. In those cases, I wouldn't say it matters whether it's official or unofficial because there is barely any difference.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

3) A song can be cut in many different ways and different lengths so if someone makes a 1 minute cut of a song, it would still have the same title as a 3 minute cut. This can be an even bigger problem if a song consists of parts which sound very different from each other. Some known examples for this are https://osu.ppy.sh/s/823960 and https://osu.ppy.sh/s/456366 but there are actually many songs with such a contrast (mostly electronic songs with a calm intro/outro and very heavy drops). Cutting the song in a way that makes only one part of the song remain would get the Cut Ver. marker, but if someone else cut the other part, it would get the marker as well despite being completely different.

dong wrote:

Both a 1 minute cut and 3 minute cut are unofficial cuts, and the official mp3 should take precedence when working out metdata in this case. I don't see a problem with having this distinction for both of these cases, because if someone is downloading a map with a "Cut ver." marker, they know that some amount of the song has been cut in comparison to any official cut. It simply exists to better inform the player about what it is they are downloading.

It may inform them that it's a cut, but they still don't know what they're downloading. They know nothing about the length or about which part of the song the map contains and that is more important than whether it's an official or unofficial cut.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

4) What if someone cuts a song but extends it at the same time? Like, if one part of a song is removed but a different part that happens to be longer is being looped, it would be both a cut and an extension at the same time. I'm not sure if this has been done before but considering all the audio file edits people have done in order to go around song length limits (adding R3 Music Box, looping parts of the song several times, putting 2 songs together etc.), this would be a viable possibility.

dong wrote:

Would this fall under a remix? If you're adding an R3 Music Box section, that information is already in the metadata, as can be seen in this map for example. If parts of the same song are looped without cutting any other parts out, that's an extension. I believe this should also be reflected in the metadata the same way i believe "Cut ver." should be. If parts are both cut and looped, well, you're mapping a frankenstein's monster - I guess it's a remix. How often does this happen? It's definitely not the same song at that point, you're telling me that shouldn't be reflected in the metadata upfront? That's even more serious that my initial problem. There is also already a guideline against this in the RC. It's a guideline, but that means the case should be less than common.

It's not a remix because the song hasn't been changed in a way that makes a new/different song. The parts of the song are simply being assembled in a different way, but the song itself is still the same.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

5) If a song has a long outro (more than 20%) which the mapper doesn't want to map, they would have to cut it for the sake of rankability, but then they would have to add (Cut Ver.) to the title despite basically mapping the full song.

dong wrote:

er, yes, this is a Cut ver. You have removed a part of the song from the mp3, outro or not. If it's 20% of the song, I'd say that's pretty significant, too. Whether or not "not mapping this intro/outro" constitutes "basically mapping the full song" is subjective, but I disagree.

I think you misunderstood me because I didn't fully explain the issue. The RC states that an audio file must be cut if the last 20% of it are unmapped. There are songs where the outro is a very long fade out or the same rhythm being repeated dozens of times in a row. Both of these cases wouldn't be very interesting to map and it would be understandable if a mapper decides to not map those parts, just like any other part of the song they are not interested in mapping.

I also added 7) in my post above right after you made your comment so I guess you should read that as well.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

Yes, but it's not reasonable because you are changing the metadata of the song without changing the song. That's like saying the metadata needs to be changed because someone didn't map the intro or outro of the song. If someone does that, they are also removing a part of the song from the map, yet the metadata remains the same. The distinction between unofficial and official cuts is not as important as you think because many unofficial cuts sound very similar to official ones and reflect the song well. In those cases, I wouldn't say it matters whether it's official or unofficial because there is barely any difference.

I think the marker literally saying "(Cut ver.) is quite clear in what it means. It sounds the same - so does a TV Size. I don't really see your argument. Are you saying that historically markers have only been used when the song it changed in such a way that makes it sound different? In that case, I would like this to change.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

It may inform them that it's a cut, but they still don't know what they're downloading. They know nothing about the length or about which part of the song the map contains and that is more important than whether it's an official or unofficial cut.

If the website in ingame downloader is improved to display the length, I'm all for it, but that doesn't seem to be happening anytime soon and i would still argue for this marker to be required on maps as I can clearly see that the lack of there being a marker is being used in a misleading way. If something like this was promised in the near future I could potentially back down, but as of now, this is my proposal.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

It's not a remix because the song hasn't been changed in a way that makes a new/different song. The parts of the song are simply being assembled in a different way, but the song itself is still the same.

I completely disagree that the song is the same, and i definitely disagree that people should be able to completely reorder parts of a song without specifying such in the title. This appears to be a different concern than what I express in the OP though, but I can see people using this as a loophole, which would make the whole situation worse.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

I think you misunderstood me because I didn't fully explain the issue. The RC states that an audio file must be cut if the last 20% of it are unmapped. There are songs where the outro is a very long fade out or the same rhythm being repeated dozens of times in a row. Both of these cases wouldn't be very interesting to map and it would be understandable if a mapper decides to not map those parts, just like any other part of the song they are not interested in mapping.

In my ideal world this is still a Cut ver. but the line is thinner. I wouldn't consider a song with less than 20% of the ending not mapped (but not cut) a cut version, so I'm willing to compromise on outros. I can't say I have a robust argument against this.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

Having this marker on a big portion of ranked maps simply looks bad and it would be even worse for songs that have (Sped Up Ver.) or (Nightcore Mix) in the title because most of them are cuts so those would have 2 markers next to each other and that looks horrible

Other markers for songs that are literally a remix (Sped up ver., Nightcore Mix) take precedence over "Cut ver.", definitely. I don't see a problem with including one and not the other. Whether or not it "looks bad" is subjective. I think a map like this one NOT including "Cut ver." in the title looks bad, hence why I made this proposal in the first place.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

Yes, but it's not reasonable because you are changing the metadata of the song without changing the song. That's like saying the metadata needs to be changed because someone didn't map the intro or outro of the song.

No, these aren't comparable at all. If you remove a part of the song (a.k.a Cut it), then yeah you are definitely changing the song, and the metadata needs to reflect that. Not mapping a part of the mp3 is not changing the song at all. That should be obvious.

S. H. wrote:

It may inform them that it's a cut, but they still don't know what they're downloading. They know nothing about the length or about which part of the song the map contains and that is more important than whether it's an official or unofficial cut.

The tag should be added for exactly this reason; to prompt us players to actually look into what the hell we're about to download instead of misleading us to download your mutilated excuse of a map only a portion of what is to be expected from the metadata.

re: pishi's proposed wording, I do think using "Short Ver." would be unnecessarily ambiguous since that tag already exists and is being used for something slightly different. "Cut Ver." sounds good and descriptive.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

Yes, but it's not reasonable because you are changing the metadata of the song without changing the song. That's like saying the metadata needs to be changed because someone didn't map the intro or outro of the song. If someone does that, they are also removing a part of the song from the map, yet the metadata remains the same. The distinction between unofficial and official cuts is not as important as you think because many unofficial cuts sound very similar to official ones and reflect the song well. In those cases, I wouldn't say it matters whether it's official or unofficial because there is barely any difference.

dong wrote:

I think the marker literally saying "(Cut ver.) is quite clear in what it means. It sounds the same - so does a TV Size. I don't really see your argument. Are you saying that historically markers have only been used when the song it changed in such a way that makes it sound different? In that case, I would like this to change.

That's not what I'm saying, but I have already explained why (Cut Ver.) is not the same as (TV Size) in my other post. TV Size exists in the official metadata of some TV Size songs, later it was used for all TV Size songs regardless of whether they have the marker in the official source or not (standardization).
You didn't really address the part about unofficial and official cuts being very similar. I don't think you'd be able to tell if a certain TV Size song were official or not if the TV Size marker didn't exist. People have also been talking about making exceptions for recreations of official cuts (which is a vague definition but w/e). That already shows that unofficial cuts shouldn't be treated as something completely different.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

It may inform them that it's a cut, but they still don't know what they're downloading. They know nothing about the length or about which part of the song the map contains and that is more important than whether it's an official or unofficial cut.

dong wrote:

If the website in ingame downloader is improved to display the length, I'm all for it, but that doesn't seem to be happening anytime soon and i would still argue for this marker to be required on maps as I can clearly see that the lack of there being a marker is being used in a misleading way. If something like this was promised in the near future I could potentially back down, but as of now, this is my proposal.

I am aware that such changes are unlikely to happen/take a long time but making such drastic workaround changes isn't a reasonable option just because the interface doesn't include every information you'd like to have. I don't really get what you mean by "the lack of there being a marker is being used in a misleading way" because nobody is doing anything misleading by simply using the normal song title just like for the past 10 years.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

It's not a remix because the song hasn't been changed in a way that makes a new/different song. The parts of the song are simply being assembled in a different way, but the song itself is still the same.

dong wrote:

I completely disagree that the song is the same, and i definitely disagree that people should be able to completely reorder parts of a song without specifying such in the title. This appears to be a different concern than what I express in the OP though, but I can see people using this as a loophole, which would make the whole situation worse.

What I mean by "the song is the same" is that the sounds are not being edited. Of course there is a difference between the original song and a version where the parts of the song are ordered in a different way but it's still not a remix.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

I think you misunderstood me because I didn't fully explain the issue. The RC states that an audio file must be cut if the last 20% of it are unmapped. There are songs where the outro is a very long fade out or the same rhythm being repeated dozens of times in a row. Both of these cases wouldn't be very interesting to map and it would be understandable if a mapper decides to not map those parts, just like any other part of the song they are not interested in mapping.

dong wrote:

In my ideal world this is still a Cut ver. but the line is thinner. I wouldn't consider a song with less than 20% of the ending not mapped (but not cut) a cut version, so I'm willing to compromise on outros. I can't say I have a robust argument against this.

So your solution for this would be that maps where the outro is cut don't need this marker?

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

Having this marker on a big portion of ranked maps simply looks bad and it would be even worse for songs that have (Sped Up Ver.) or (Nightcore Mix) in the title because most of them are cuts so those would have 2 markers next to each other and that looks horrible

dong wrote:

Other markers for songs that are literally a remix (Sped up ver., Nightcore Mix) take precedence over "Cut ver.", definitely. I don't see a problem with including one and not the other. Whether or not it "looks bad" is subjective. I think a map like this one NOT including "Cut ver." in the title looks bad, hence why I made this proposal in the first place.

That doesn't make any sense because you say that the point of this proposal is to know whether a song is an unofficial cut or not when downloading it, yet in these cases you wouldn't be able to tell the difference if there is a full version and a cut version of the song.
Of course "looks bad" is subjective but I think most people prefer seeing a title without an unnecessary marker

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

Yes, but it's not reasonable because you are changing the metadata of the song without changing the song. That's like saying the metadata needs to be changed because someone didn't map the intro or outro of the song.

Lefafel wrote:

No, these aren't comparable at all. If you remove a part of the song (a.k.a Cut it), then yeah you are definitely changing the song, and the metadata needs to reflect that. Not mapping a part of the mp3 is not changing the song at all. That should be obvious.

There is not really much of a difference between the outro of a song being cut or it being unmapped, especially when it's not even noticeable for players.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

It may inform them that it's a cut, but they still don't know what they're downloading. They know nothing about the length or about which part of the song the map contains and that is more important than whether it's an official or unofficial cut.

Lefafel wrote:

The tag should be added for exactly this reason; to prompt us players to actually look into what the hell we're about to download instead of misleading us to download your mutilated excuse of a map only a portion of what is to be expected from the metadata.

Even with (Cut Ver.), you still don't know how much was cut and what the cut actually sounds like. Therefore it could still be "misleading" if you consider it that way.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

That's not what I'm saying, but I have already explained why (Cut Ver.) is not the same as (TV Size) in my other post. TV Size exists in the official metadata of some TV Size songs, later it was used for all TV Size songs regardless of whether they have the marker in the official source or not (standardization).
You didn't really address the part about unofficial and official cuts being very similar. I don't think you'd be able to tell if a certain TV Size song were official or not if the TV Size marker didn't exist. People have also been talking about making exceptions for recreations of official cuts (which is a vague definition but w/e). That already shows that unofficial cuts shouldn't be treated as something completely different.

I am well aware that Cut Ver. is not the same as TV Size, I was just using an example. I didn't really understand your point. The problem here is that while a TV Size cut includes this fact in the metadata, because it is the official metadata, an unofficially cut version does not, whereas I believe that it should. TV size of obviously not the correct marker to use in this case, so I propose that we enforce the use of Cut ver.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

I am aware that such changes are unlikely to happen/take a long time but making such drastic workaround changes isn't a reasonable option just because the interface doesn't include every information you'd like to have. I don't really get what you mean by "the lack of there being a marker is being used in a misleading way" because nobody is doing anything misleading by simply using the normal song title just like for the past 10 years.

I download a song with the normal title, and expect it to be the official full length of the song. If it is not, then it is misleading. I believe Ephemeral recently summed up this problem in a tweet: https://twitter.com/ephemeralis/status/1153205847259897856

This is a sentiment that a lot of players share.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

What I mean by "the song is the same" is that the sounds are not being edited. Of course there is a difference between the original song and a version where the parts of the song are ordered in a different way but it's still not a remix.

Do you believe that this doesn't warrant a distinction in the metadata, then? Like I said I don't think the problem I initially set out to fix covers this question but I'm really not sure what to say to you if you honestly believe that an mp3 as heavily edited as you describe should have the exact same metadata as the official song.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

So your solution for this would be that maps where the outro is cut don't need this marker?

yeah, I can compromise if this is done specifically because the outro is a looping part of the music and you wish to cut it to meet that 20% threshold.

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

That doesn't make any sense because you say that the point of this proposal is to know whether a song is an unofficial cut or not when downloading it, yet in these cases you wouldn't be able to tell the difference if there is a full version and a cut version of the song.
Of course "looks bad" is subjective but I think most people prefer seeing a title without an unnecessary marker

I completely disagree that most people would prefer seeing a title without an unnecessary marker, but you'd have to ask them. I've provided many examples on reddit (and the replies to Ephemeral's recent tweet) that people are sick and tired of this problem, so you tell me if more people think otherwise.

I see your point with having two markers next to each other, and the problem continuing when someone uploads a remix short ver. - good loophole, too. Necessary evil, in my opinion, but if we need to combine tags I can compromise there too (eg. (Short Nightcore ver)). Better than no solution at all. I think these additional, unofficial tags should be judged on whether or not they accurately reflect the song, and that call can be made during the ranking process.