Nope, Kevin Bacon wasn't in Footloose. (a rating debacle)

[Nexx]

But yeah, say I was only rating maps that deserved a 0 rating. Where's the problem? The system's not being abused in my mind. I thought accurate votes was the point of this topic?

No, the system isn't being abused (as I said previously). Thus, you are not in violation of the things this thread was posted for.

However, personally, I think you're being a bit mean. It is a waste of your time to play a map on the first page that you're pretty sure is going to suck just so you can rate it down. When you see such a map, just pass it by. If you really want to rate something, come play some of my maps or something. I'm just sure there is a better way to spend that time.

[Tunco]

But yeah, say I was only rating maps that deserved a 0 rating. Where's the problem? The system's not being abused in my mind. I thought accurate votes was the point of this topic?

No, the system isn't being abused (as I said previously). Thus, you are not in violation of the things this thread was posted for.

However, personally, I think you're being a bit mean. It is a waste of your time to play a map on the first page that you're pretty sure is going to suck just so you can rate it down. When you see such a map, just pass it by. If you really want to rate something, come play some of my maps or something. I'm just sure there is a better way to spend that time.

I think that's partly right. Because it is a waste of your time to play a map on the first page that you're pretty sure is going to suck so you just can rate it down as Avarin said, although rating maps below than 2 is not a morale for the mapper to continue mapping. So that's not right, in fact, you're just stopping the person to improve his/her [the specific author] mapping skills and be a beneficial author for numa and everyone. That's like stopping your customers entering your store and buying something they really want. And guess what, that's not okay, it's rather a system in crysis when you look this from my perspective.

Think about it, there are plenty of authors that makes numa run -by plenty I mean that a hundred or two hundred people- but each of these people are active on numa for a long time and their activeness is going to start/ started to decrease because they're bored of mapping for a long time and they just leave. There got to be some people who needs to fill in their places, right? In order to make this system working without errors an empty space needs to filled with the next person. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that people will quit and system is worthless, but it's just a system with some empty spaces in it, and you can only fill that space with equipoise of the quitting/ coming members. But I need to explain this more.

When you give a map a "0" or a "1" or a "2" I think that it's not a good morale to encourage someone continue mapping, so eventually the [specific] person will stop making maps. Rather than just giving "0" or a "1" or a "2" to the map you should consider leaving a comment including how he/she [the specific author] could improve his/ her mapping skills. By leaving a comment like that, you encourage the person to map more and have pro-advice that will sure help solve his some of problems he/ she [the specific author] encounters with while making maps. Using this strategy/ mental guide/ call-it-what-ever-you-want, you don't use the system for your own personal 'enjoyment' [Giving 0 to a map and not explaining why] and don't damage the system, things just work they should be. And yes, you think the system is not abusing by this way but it is. Please don't abuse the system.

I hope this helps. I think I elaborated myself quite clearly. Also Ad, no offense please, I'm just saying this general, not to you as a personal attack or something.

[otters~1]

Thing is, Nexx, I usually just search up my favorite authors for the very reason that most of the Hot Maps is worthless. But you guys are always railing on about rating underappreciated mappers and stuff, so occasionally, if I have time, I just play everything. Mostly I NR instead of giving a zero, but not always.

[Nexx]

Thing is, Nexx, I usually just search up my favorite authors for the very reason that most of the Hot Maps is worthless. But you guys are always railing on about rating underappreciated mappers and stuff, so occasionally, if I have time, I just play everything.

That's true, but I personally rail on about how a lot of decent-to-good maps go relatively unnoticed, not all maps in general. Truth be told, nub maps are almost always a waste of time, IMO.

Btw, Ad & flag, thanks for having a reasoned discussion. I appreciate it.

[Rose]

If one person rating accurately would fix the system, I would do it.

That's the same "logic" that is used by people who don't vote because they feel it can't make a difference. :/

[amomentlikethis]

#1
As a community we have easily jumped to the conclusion that someone has sniped our maps when it has dropped as little as a point. When really, two people rate a map, one 4/5 the other 5/5, it would only take one more 4/5 to drop it to a 4/5 rating.

Anyone who regards a 5 to a 4 as a snipe is a complete retard.
A map that has 0/5 with 1 vote is a snipe. A map that goes from 4/5 with 1 vote to 2/5 with 2 is a snipe. Anything other than that doesn't really matter as by the time most maps have 3 ratings they're well off the Hot Maps page anyway.

#2
I support the option to disable ratings on your maps, but why are people who disable ratings on all of their maps allowed to still take part in the other half of the system? It encourages abuse because they simply do not care about the system. Just something that I think should be taken into consideration, I know a lot of you out there don't rate anyways.

Most people only rate terrible maps and maps they think are brilliant. The middle-range maps generally get no attention whatsoever. Being able to disable ratings is cowardly; yet at the same rate ratings serve barely any purpose whatsoever.

#3
If you want to stop sniping you're going to have to start rating more realistically and honestly. Before you give that map a 4, think to yourself, is this really 'very good'? Is it really that much better than above average? Secondly, you're going to have to stop boosting and 'anti-sniping' maps. This is just as bad as a snipe, and actually encourages more sniping. Snipers see themselves as equalizers. The more you rate maps realistically, the more the rating average goes down, less sniping will occur.

People who anti-snipe are as retarded as the people mentioned in #1. You may as well go around rating all maps up, regardless of whether they've been sniped or not.

#4
Everyone can feature maps! Don't rate maps 5 to make them float, it just encourages sniping and further abuses the system.

Bring back Top Rated. Bring back Bitesized.

#5
The rating system isn't broken, if we just all do our part. If we work as a team, if each person can do their best to do just two things, we can help fix (probably not completely) a lot of the bitching and moaning in numa. It just takes a little work. First, rate more realistically, and second, try to accept 3/5 as a good rating, an above average rating.

The Rating System isn't broken, it just serves very little purpose. Who truely gives a shit if a map gets sniped; I'd feel more let down if i received a really lame-ass comment about why my map isn't bad, but it's just filler or something.

Ohh shit. I care. I'm not cool no more. ;-;

I know, right. You need to get laid.

[Rose]

Bring back Top Rated. Bring back Bitesized.

Top Rated will just make things easier for snipers (I wasn't around when Top Rated was, but wasn't it removed because of a mass sniping problem?). But I, too, would like to see Bitesized.

[amomentlikethis]

Top Rated will just make things easier for snipers

Top Rated gives ratings a purpose. At the moment they do absolutely nothing.

[T3chno]

A map that has 0/5 with 1 vote is a snipe. A map that goes from 4/5 with 1 vote to 2/5 with 2 is a snipe.

Wait what.

So a map can't be "worthless" or "Very poor?"

[amomentlikethis]

A map that has 0/5 with 1 vote is a snipe. A map that goes from 4/5 with 1 vote to 2/5 with 2 is a snipe.

Wait what.

So a map can't be "worthless" or "Very poor?"

Don't be a smartass, babycakes.

[SlappyMcGee]

I think he makes a valid point, amlt.

[origami_alligator]

Bring back Top Rated. Bring back Bitesized.

Top Rated will just make things easier for snipers (I wasn't around when Top Rated was, but wasn't it removed because of a mass sniping problem?). But I, too, would like to see Bitesized.

Top Rated was removed partially because of sniping and partially because the difference in the average rating from the first map to the 10th map was less than 1/100th of a vote. There was little difference in the average rating for the maps that stagnated at the top of the page and so it seemed pointless otherwise. A Top Rated with stagnating maps is a poorly listed Top Rated system, IMO. If we were to bring back Top Rated we would need to have it in increments of time rather than just an "All Time" page. From 1 Day to 1 Year and then an All Time page would be preferable.

A map that has 0/5 with 1 vote is a snipe. A map that goes from 4/5 with 1 vote to 2/5 with 2 is a snipe.

Wait what.

So a map can't be "worthless" or "Very poor?"

Techno makes an incredibly valid point. Although much of the community refuses to vote when they are considering rating 2 or less, the "perceived value" of a map (when ratings are considered, mind you) is subject to the people who play it. If someone genuinely does not like your map and they decide to rate a 1 or a 0 that is a fair and valuable rating, something that we all seem to want and yet when someone does this and leaves a comment explaining why they voted this way everyone assumes it is sniping and freaks out. It's the malicious voting meant to bring other maps down that is sniping. Sure, it's hard to tell the difference but I don't see it as any worse than rating a 5 just because you were part of the collaboration map or because it's a birthday map, and so on and so forth. It's still inaccurate to give a higher rating for being a part of something rather than voting on how you actually feel the map plays.

[rocket_thumped]

If someone genuinely does not like your map and they decide to rate a 1 or a 0 that is a fair and valuable rating, something that we all seem to want and yet when someone does this and leaves a comment explaining why they voted this way everyone assumes it is sniping and freaks out. It's the malicious voting meant to bring other maps down that is sniping. Sure, it's hard to tell the difference but I don't see it as any worse than rating a 5 just because you were part of the collaboration map or because it's a birthday map, and so on and so forth. It's still inaccurate to give a higher rating for being a part of something rather than voting on how you actually feel the map plays.

Yes sir, that was the point of this thread.

[SlappyMcGee]

If someone genuinely does not like your map and they decide to rate a 1 or a 0 that is a fair and valuable rating, something that we all seem to want and yet when someone does this and leaves a comment explaining why they voted this way everyone assumes it is sniping and freaks out. It's the malicious voting meant to bring other maps down that is sniping. Sure, it's hard to tell the difference but I don't see it as any worse than rating a 5 just because you were part of the collaboration map or because it's a birthday map, and so on and so forth. It's still inaccurate to give a higher rating for being a part of something rather than voting on how you actually feel the map plays.

Yes sir, that was the point of this thread.

I couldn't be bothered to read that incredible monster of an OP, but now that I know the point of the thread, let me contribute:

:: I think a lot of the problem with zeroes+comments it the tone the commenters take towards mapmakers. Like, "UTTER SHIT! This map is stupid, hard, and I hate it. 0/5". I mean, can you be a lot more constructive? If a map is truly below a three, there are a lot of places where you can improve it.

[amomentlikethis]

If someone genuinely does not like your map and they decide to rate a 1 or a 0 that is a fair and valuable rating.

A 1 in this case is undestandable, but unless the map is unplayable I don't see how a 0 would be a fair and valuable rating. 0, according to the lil' drop down ratings menu, is equal to worthless; and very few maps on NUMA are actually this bad.
You guys clearly didn't understand the point I was trying to make before. If somebody rates your map a 4 it means they think it's very good. In the case that it actually was a very good map, if it dropped down to an average rating of 2 on it's second vote, it would be a snipe. I fail to see how anyone could find what one person finds very good a worthless map.
Equally, if the map clearly wasn't worthless, a 0 rating on first vote would be a snipe.

A map can't be worthless and very good at the same time; that's just moronic.

I don't see it as any worse than rating a 5 just because you were part of the collaboration map or because it's a birthday map, and so on and so forth.

Duh; there is no difference between this and a snipe. People who base their ratings on some outside variable are (as I said in my first post) retarded.

[origami_alligator]

A map can't be worthless and very good at the same time; that's just moronic.

Right. Eggs can't be worthless and very good at the same time; I like mine over-easy, how about you?
---
As for the rest of what you said, I think it rather silly to rate a map based on what word(s) come(s) after a number. Why not give your own value to the numbers instead of what the website tells you?

[im_bad_at_n]

As for the rest of what you said, I think it rather silly to rate a map based on what word(s) come(s) after a number. Why not give your own value to the numbers instead of what the website tells you?

That is how I rate maps. 0 = 0%, 1 = 20%, ... , 5 = 100%. Like how schools grade. And in my sad world, a "b" or an 80% or a 4/5 is a kinda decent grade. a 3/5 is a "d" grade which is very bad in my book...

I rarely rate something a 0-2 and it is usually because somebody plagarized a different persons map completely. =/

[T3chno]

As for the rest of what you said, I think it rather silly to rate a map based on what word(s) come(s) after a number. Why not give your own value to the numbers instead of what the website tells you?

Why don't we take out those words? I think it'd be interesting if it was number-based only.

[origami_alligator]

Why don't we take out those words?

(see: Caring_Administrator)

[T3chno]

Why don't we take out those words?

(see: Caring_Administrator)

Feelings, bots have not. :(

[origami_alligator]

Why don't we take out those words?

(see: Caring_Administrator)

Feelings, bots have not. :(

The band Spoon once sang, "I've got a feeling, it don't come cheap." I'm sure the Emotion Upgrade Pack for robots is a steep price.

[squibbles]

(see: Caring_Administrator)

Feelings, bots have not. :(

The band Spoon once sang, "I've got a feeling, it don't come cheap." I'm sure the Emotion Upgrade Pack for robots is a steep price.

I'm sure that there is more than enough gold on NUMA to cover any cost.

[origami_alligator]

The band Spoon once sang, "I've got a feeling, it don't come cheap." I'm sure the Emotion Upgrade Pack for robots is a steep price.

I'm sure that there is more than enough gold on NUMA to cover any cost.

Nah, man, we stopped using the gold standard a long time ago.

[amomentlikethis]

Why not give your own value to the numbers instead of what the website tells you?

Isn't that what snipers do?
'Ohi this map is awesome, 0!!'

[SlappyMcGee]

Why not give your own value to the numbers instead of what the website tells you?

Isn't that what snipers do?
'Ohi this map is awesome, 0!!'

Dude, do you not understand that the concept of worth is subjective? For instance, a capsule of penicilin is worthless to me, as I am allergic, but remarkably valuable to a child who needs it to cure the measles or whatever the fuck it does.

Worth is a subjective process.