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