Metanet Forums

Have any of you thought about featuring a map for someone but then saw how many features they already had and decided not too? Just something I have been wondering about...

I don't review often, I try to bring less-featured or featureless authors into the spotlight when I can. The purpose of featuring is to give a map that didn't get the attention it deserved another chance. The more an author is featured, the more attention they get, and the less they need attention from additional featuring. That said, not /every/ feature has to be some profoundly unrecognized map from a profoundly unrecognized author.

To answer your original question, yes, I have, and it forced me to dig deeper into my favorites and look at more maps to come up with a better feature, which I think is a good thing. Again, though, there's nothing wrong with featuring an already-featured author or even an author with multiple features.

Yea, I for one try to find maps by people that haven't been featured or are a bit more obscure. But quality is still quality, and at the end of the day, I want to review a damn good map, and if that means someone is getting there 123th feature, so be it.

epigone wrote:123th

123rd? Grammar fail. OCD scale going haywire :/

To answer Spudz, no, I never think that, ever. The fact they've made a load of maps of a consistently high quality is probably more of an incentive for me to bring them into the spotlight than any kind of penalty. However, I can agree that features should be used to bring new authors into the spotlight just as often if not more so. But if a map is truly exceptional, then I don't care who the author is unless I want to use the context in my review.

But, I don't like featuring maps from disabled users. It's quite hypocritical considering my previous argument, but there's just something i don't like about recognising an author who's either given up willingly or had to have been removed. Imo, this martyr-like-imagery isn't something I want to propagate.

GTM wrote:if a map is truly exceptional, then I don't care who the author is

QFE

It's not about the author, it's about the map.

maxson924 wrote:It's not about the author, it's about the map.

Actually, I phrased that completely the wrong way.

I'm not going to let the worth of a map be penalised by something as shallow as the fame of the author. But if I'm seeing progression of ideas (like I've done with that hoohah review) or something else which personally engages me in the author which the map signifies, then obviously that's going to affect the context of my review.

GTM wrote:

maxson924 wrote:It's not about the author, it's about the map.

Actually, I phrased that completely the wrong way.

I'm not going to let the worth of a map be penalised by something as shallow as the fame of the author. But if I'm seeing progression of ideas (like I've done with that hoohah review) or something else which personally engages me in the author which the map signifies, then obviously that's going to affect the context of my review.

I wasn't talking about the review itself, I was talking about the choice of the map I'm going to feature.

martyr-like-imagery?

A bit over the top maybe? Perhaps some people just like to put a definitive end on things, or to quit while they're ahead, rather than slowly fading out with more and more mediocre maps.

Or maybe all of this has nothing to do with the quality of their map making?

Probably over the top. It doesn't affect the quality of the maps but there's just something that doesnt feel right to me as a reviewer. And quitting while you're ahead doesnt necessarily justify disabling accounts; how many countless people like Lucidium and AsTimeFliesBy havent mapped in ages, yet didnt want to disable their accounts? One doesnt necessarily equate to the other, unless it signifies something else.

Also, I was reffering to Mekkah, if that's of any relevance. Of course, I don't know the whole story, so let me know if I've got some facts wrong about his departure.

You are a sanctimonious, arrogant arsehole of the highest order.

If you were referring to Mekkah, why not mention it...but yeah, I suppose you most definitely are promoting another user's ideals and opinions by pointing out a brilliant map they once made. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter who the user is, whether they have an interesting or awful back story, just as long as you give a good map more and deserving attention. If I were still a reviewer I wouldn't hesitate to review any user's map based on who they were. Your mindset sounds like it will lead to cliquish reviewing.

Well yeah, the quality of the map comes first. But if the context is just going to bring the feature into a negative light and spark conflict (check the link or the other link which you've already seen for more of my self-righteous and hypocritical ramblings) then would you want to be the person who featured it? There's no point in showing praise through a review if the context sparks conflict.

But, to be fair, I realise this is missing the point a little. Long story short, I shouldn't have stereotyped disabled users as I did, especially if I don't know the full story.

To answer your Mekkah question, I didn't feel it was necessary to name names until you took offense and now not doing so would have caused more trouble than its worth. I was genuinely thinking of featuring your race, Amylase despite my initial prejudices, but couldn't come up with a decent review for it. I'll probably come back to it later; had I been able to come up with a review worth reading, I'd happily have submitted it yesterday. Because it's a good enough map to warrant the feature, and I shouldn't let my narrow-mindedness impede its progress. I know how bullshitty this sounds given the context, but its true. Take it as you will.

I usually have a couple features with me at a time, and I bring out the less-known maps before the more well-known ones.
Sooner or later, I'm going to get through my extras, though.

Pheidippides wrote:Again, though, there's nothing wrong with featuring an already-featured author or even an author with multiple features.

Hehe, coming from the guy who received 7 features in a period of 2 months. :P

I like featuring authors/ideas/uniqueness, rather than maps. It's my hope that with a feature a person can gain inspiration, implement an idea that they've never implemented before, or discover a new favourite author.

spudzalot wrote:Have any of you thought about featuring a map for someone but then saw how many features they already had and decided not too? Just something I have been wondering about...

Ahaha, says the guy with 5 features. But yeah, I try to feature people with less features.

Manus Australis wrote:

Pheidippides wrote:Again, though, there's nothing wrong with featuring an already-featured author or even an author with multiple features.

Hehe, coming from the guy who received 7 features in a period of 2 months. :P

I'm writing from the perspective of a reviewer, not a mapper. I haven't been an active mapper on NUMA in a long time (...which doesn't mean I'm not an active mapper away from NUMA :P). I've featured atob and frogs, who have multiple features, and I've featured Hawkk, who is not very well-known. Both ends of the spectrum are obviously acceptable here, given the number of authors with 4+ features as well as the number of relatively obscure authors who have been featured, and that's the point I was trying to make.

Oh, and that period of 2 months ended 6 months ago. Gosh, between this thread and the Getting Your Maps Noticed thread, people think I only open my mouth to advertise. ',:/

Pheidippides wrote:

Manus Australis wrote:

Pheidippides wrote:Again, though, there's nothing wrong with featuring an already-featured author or even an author with multiple features.

Hehe, coming from the guy who received 7 features in a period of 2 months. :P

I'm writing from the perspective of a reviewer, not a mapper. I haven't been an active mapper on NUMA in a long time (...which doesn't mean I'm not an active mapper away from NUMA :P). I've featured atob and frogs, who have multiple features, and I've featured Hawkk, who is not very well-known. Both ends of the spectrum are obviously acceptable here, given the number of authors with 4+ features as well as the number of relatively obscure authors who have been featured, and that's the point I was trying to make.

Oh, and that period of 2 months ended 6 months ago. Gosh, between this thread and the Getting Your Maps Noticed thread, people think I only open my mouth to advertise. ',:/

I know, I know. I was just giving you a hard time :P
I just remember when NEWMA was taking off and everybody was featuring your maps like crazy. I saw it more from the point of "Pheidi is an amazing author so I'm gonna poke fun at him" rather than "Pheidi is advertising." ^_^

In that case, I heart you too, pawz. :)

So far every one of my reviews has been for an author who previously had none. The corncobs one I guess wouldn't count, but meh.

Radium wrote:

spudzalot wrote:Have any of you thought about featuring a map for someone but then saw how many features they already had and decided not too? Just something I have been wondering about...

Ahaha, says the guy with 5 features. But yeah, I try to feature people with less features.

Hehe. Well I did get a comment a while back that brought this topic to my mind. But its nothing.