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

[rocket_thumped]

<ChrisE> because you disabled ratings
<scrivener> i disable all ratings
<scrivener> it's my strike
<scrivener> ratings really don't mean much
<ChrisE> they keep you on the hotmaps
<scrivener> the only benefit is making your maps float on hotmaps
<scrivener> i've gotten to the point where if I see a map that deserves attention I just rate it 5
<Leaff> uh
<Leaff> if you're trying to take a strike
<Leaff> shouldn't you just not rate them at all
<scrivener> i can still use the ratings system to my advantage
<scrivener> rating maps 5 will float them on hotmaps
<scrivener> allowing more people to see and enjoy them
<Leaff> that kind of just makes you another misuser of the system
<jerrod> It does.
<Leaff> which you seem to be hung up about
<scrivener> how so?
<Leaff> [16:59:22] <scrivener> i've gotten to the point where if I see a map that deserves attention I just rate it 5
<jerrod> If you rate at all it should be what you honestly think the map is worth.
<scrivener> yeah
<scrivener> but nobody does that
<jerrod> that doesn't matter.
<Leaff> that doesn't mean you doing it too will help, scrivener
<jerrod> And people do do that.
<Seneschal> Most people who rate do rate what they think it's worth
<scrivener> if I did rate
<scrivener> then my ratings would average to a 2.5
<Leaff> scrivener
<Leaff> the hell
<scrivener> and everyone would call me a sniper
<jerrod> scrivener, good.
<Seneschal> there's nothing wrong with 2.5
<jerrod> that's what you ought to be doing.
<scrivener> ppl would say there was
<Leaff> you're complaining about people misusing the system when you're misusing it yourself
<scrivener> i'm not complaining
<jerrod> exactly.
<Leaff> you're taking a strike / whatever the hell you're doing
<Leaff> because of people misusing the system and you're misusing it yourself
<scrivener> i simply disable ratings on my maps
<scrivener> your point?
<Leaff> [16:59:22] <scrivener> i've gotten to the point where if I see a map that deserves attention I just rate it 5
<jerrod> I thought you were on 'strike'?
<Leaff> MY POINT IS THAT YOU'RE BEING A HYPOCRIT
<scrivener> my strike is disabling ratings
<scrivener> if you all choose to accept your system of ratings
<Leaff> ... uh
<scrivener> i have nothing wrong twith that
<Leaff> you're being dumb
<scrivener> okay
<jerrod> you really are.
<scrivener> i'm an incredibly dumb individual.
<jerrod> You're backing out of previous statements.
<Leaff> you want to fix the ratings system by misusing it
<Leaff> and ba- yeah
<scrivener> I'm not trying to fix it
<scrivener> it's broken
<Leaff> you're on strike
<Leaff> as in you want change in it
<Leaff> am i right?
<scrivener> eventually everyone will realise how broken it is.
<scrivener> I DO NOT WANT TO CHANGE ANYTHING
<jerrod> IT isn't broken.
<Leaff> then don't complain about it .-.
<jerrod> The system is not broken.
<Riobe> what is going on
<jerrod> The system works fine.
<scrivener> i have not complained once
<jerrod> It's the douches in the system.
<jerrod> and you are just adding to that by doing what you're doing.
<Leaff> Yeah.
<scrivener> no
<Leaff> Yes.
<squibbles> I...am confused. :S
<scrivener> i am giving good maps more attention.
<Leaff> SCRIVENER
<Leaff> ASDF
<scrivener> i disable ratings because the ratings don't mean anything to me
<Leaff> and they don't mean anything to you
<Leaff> because people mess them up
<Leaff> or whatever
<Leaff> correct?
<scrivener> no
<scrivener> here i'll just explain it as fully as i can.
<scrivener> i rate maps to give them more attention, and i disable ratings because the ratings people give me don't mean anything to me.
<scrivener> it's that simple.
<jerrod> okay. you're wrong.
<scrivener> okay.
<Leaff> explain
<scrivener> explain what
<scrivener> what do you want to know
<jerrod> I understood you from the beginning.
<Leaff> how you are not being a hypocrite
<jerrod> I still think you're wrong.
<scrivener> how am i being a hypocrite
<scrivener> and why am I wrong
<jerrod> I don't know if you're being a hypocrite, but you're abusing the system.
<scrivener> how?
<jerrod> By not rating honestly.
<scrivener> honestly?
<jerrod> If you want to bring attention to a map, feature it.
<scrivener> i wish i could
<jerrod> You can!
<scrivener> oh shit yeah ur right
<jerrod> Everyone has the power to feature maps now.
<scrivener> but i might as well use rates until then
<scrivener> it's not as if I'm multi-accounting
<jerrod> But the point I think Leaff was getting at is that you are abstaining from a system that's being abused, but you still abuse it as well.
<Leaff> Yeah.
<jerrod> Which..
<scrivener> what is, then, the purpose of the rating system?
<jerrod> Brings up the point of why people who disable ratings are even allowed to rate.
<Leaff> to say how good you think a map is
<Leaff> more or less
<jerrod> The float system came way after the rating system did.
<scrivener> without the float system I would rate like you.
<jerrod> It's just a consequence of your rate. Not the reason for your rate.
<Leaff> 'xactly
<scrivener> think about what you just said.
<Leaff> And?
<squibbles> actually, I kinda agree with scrivener
<scrivener> i think you'll find the contradiction.
<squibbles> except if you rate honestly, then that should have the same effect
<Leaff> Where, scrivener?
<jerrod> If you rate honestly, then the honest good maps will float.
<scrivener> squibbles: only if everyone rated honestly.
<scrivener> almost every map is 4.
<scrivener> some are 3 and 5.
<Leaff> not really
<jerrod> Okay, so this brings us back to the orignial point.
* Leaff looks at hot maps
<jerrod> What you're doing is wrong.
<Leaff> scrivener, this is a 4? http://www.nmaps.net/190823
<Leaff> This? http://www.nmaps.net/190822
<jerrod> two wrongs don't make a right.
<Leaff> (keep in mind i am not playing these)
<scrivener> i don't see my two wrongs.
<scrivener> and leaff, that is a consequence of the float system.
<scrivener> nvmd
<Leaff> ...
<Leaff> what?
<scrivener> correction
<scrivener> almost every rated map is 4.
<jerrod> The first wrong is the whole of numa not rating honestly.
<scrivener> exactly.
<jerrod> The second wrong is your logic that because of that, you should do the same.
<scrivener> nobody rates honestly.
<Leaff> scrivener is being dumb
<Leaff> scrivener, some do
<scrivener> yeah
<Leaff> I do when I rate.
<Marsupilami> comments > ratings.
<jerrod> I do.
<scrivener> good
<scrivener> congrats then
<Leaff> ...
<jerrod> I always rate honestly.
<scrivener> good for you
<Leaff> ...
<Leaff> the hell scrivener
<Leaff> scrivener
<Leaff> you just said
<Leaff> that
<Leaff> [17:17:20] <scrivener> nobody rates honestly.
<jerrod> I only rate 2/3/4/5.
<Riobe> this is because people usually don't play maps that look like they're going to be below average
<scrivener> true
<Seneschal> If I rated, I'd be handing out more two and threes than four and fives
<Marsupilami> that's what i'm here for. :D
<Riobe> even less so worthless or very poor
<scrivener> but have you seen the shitty maps there are that have been rated 5/5 by people because they can't make anything better?
<scrivener> that's what i'm talking about.
<jerrod> Okay, so fix it by rating honestly.
<Seneschal> I have a related question: Why does the 0 rating even exist? Practically no-one uses it apart from snipers
<Riobe> that doesn't happen all that much, at least I don't think so. I don't pay enough attention to numa anymore >_>
<Riobe> I'd like it better if the system was like this:
<Marsupilami> what's bad is people rate 0 to bring an unfair rating down.
<Riobe> Like or Dislike
<scrivener> i've thought about it. rating honestly wouldn't fix it.
<Marsupilami> link to the map?
<Riobe> instead of numbers out of 5
<Leaff> [17:19:47] <scrivener> i've thought about it. rating honestly wouldn't fix it.
<Leaff> Rating dishonestly sure as hell wouldn't either.
<Leaff> scrivener
<Leaff> do you HONESTLY think
<squibbles> I'm sure there are others
<Leaff> that rating DISHONESTLY would help fix the DISHONEST ratings?
<scrivener> i'm not trying to fix the dishonest ratings.
<Leaff> Then why are you critisizing the people who are rating dishonestly?
<scrivener> i'm not.
<jerrod> XD
<jerrod> Has anyone seen that family guy sketch where the mule just keeps refusing to admit kevin bacon was in footloose?
<Leaff> I might have.
<Losttortuga> I think I remember that.
<jerrod> He just keeps saying no, he wasn't in it.
<jerrod> And the guy uses logic to persuade him.
<jerrod> And the mule just keeps refusing to admit his wrong.
<jerrod> Until finally he just screams NO NO NO NO NO NO
<Losttortuga> Ahahahahaha.

- - -

Alright, so the above conversation brought up a ton of points that we are going to review here. right here. in this thread.

#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. The elimination of half points has made the rating drops seem more drastic when really they aren't. In turn we attack or bitch about the people who do it. This alienates people who rate on an honest numa scale (5=brilliant, 4=very good, 3=above average, 2= below average, etc.) making them shy away from rating this way. A way to fix this is for you to do your part and readjust what you consider a good rating. 3/5 is good, you should be happy with that.

That little adjustment alone would fix most of the buillshit in the community.

#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.

#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.

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

#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.


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

[squibbles]

I request, nay, demand, a pin for this topic. It's about time we all stop with this "rating up friends" and "rating down popular people" bullshit.

Get on this NUMA.

[Spawn of Yanni]

maestro's new project will solve a bunch of rating problems, I imagine.

[29403]

This is a brilliant thread. 3 is a good rating... some people just can't get that. :D

[otters~1]

Wahahahaha. He refuses to see reason so you pull a FAMILY GUY reference on him. Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

[rocket_thumped]

<jerrod> The system is not broken.
<jerrod> The system works fine.
<jerrod> It's the douches in the system.

Also, a good metaphor for how people rate maps now a days: People give out Oscars, Golden Globes, and Razzies, there's no in between.

[remm]

Yeah, I agree that a 3/5 rating should be for a good map.
Currently 0,1,2 all mean around about the same thing if you get rated it. They all mean its a bad map, and that's the problem. You can't fill up half the scale with one meaning because then there's not enough depth left to properly rate the good maps. If a 3/5 is accepted as being a good rating, then the truly good maps can actually stand out from the not as good maps.

[T3chno]

Yeah, I agree that a 3/5 rating should be for a good map.
Currently 0,1,2 all mean around about the same thing if you get rated it. They all mean its a bad map, and that's the problem. You can't fill up half the scale with one meaning because then there's not enough depth left to properly rate the good maps. If a 3/5 is accepted as being a good rating, then the truly good maps can actually stand out from the not as good maps.

This kinda makes me thing about the Thumbs Up and Thumbs Down systems other sites have.

[origami_alligator]

This kinda makes me think we should adopt the system that MOA uses in which we don't rate the map but instead we ask people where we think the map should go in a 10-column map pack. That is, does this map play like it's an 88-4 or a 00-4?

Then we wouldn't have to care about rating the map based on its aesthetic value, ratings wouldn't be skewed based on the author. We would simply give it a number in a 10-column map pack and that would be based on its gameplay.

Besides, are you really going to get angry for making a 05-3 map? How can you get angry at that?

[/sarcasm]

[squibbles]

This kinda makes me think we should adopt the system that MOA uses in which we don't rate the map but instead we ask people where we think the map should go in a 10-column map pack. That is, does this map play like it's an 88-4 or a 00-4?

Then we wouldn't have to care about rating the map based on its aesthetic value, ratings wouldn't be skewed based on the author. We would simply give it a number in a 10-column map pack and that would be based on its gameplay.

Besides, are you really going to get angry for making a 05-3 map? How can you get angry at that?

[/sarcasm]

I would get fucking angry were someone to make a 88-4 map.

[aids]

I had an idea that the hot maps page should be weighed on both high ratings and number of comments, because spamming is easier to fix than sniping is.

[Nexx]

Also, a good metaphor for how people rate maps now a days: People give out Oscars, Golden Globes, and Razzies, there's no in between.

As much as I agree with the general point you're making here, I think your example is off. You don't get awards for mediocrity. Why would you? The stand-outs (good or bad) are, by definition, the most noteworthy.

But anyway, I agree with this thread. It's pretty well put, and hopefully it will encourage some community members to ease out of their indefensible stances concerning the rating system.

[im_bad_at_n]

I'ev always seen a 3/5 as bad because thats what it is in school. Subconsiously, the world tells me a 3/5 (like at school, a place ive been at for a long while) is a 60%, and thats a D, a bad grade. So I cant see a 3/5 being an entirely good thing. 3/5 is a tad below average if it leans away from just "average". A possible olution? Bringing back 1/2 ratings is the best suggestion i heard (in general, not necesarily here) because then there is a way to give a more accurate rate.

[mintnut]

Bringing back 1/2 ratings is the best suggestion i heard (in general, not necesarily here) because then there is a way to give a more accurate rate.

Taking your earlier example as gospel, half ratings do nothing but appease those who've been fighting for their return since NEWma.

--

Anyways, a very good post r_t, and I agree with almost everything. At the end of the day, you cannot have a non-elitist (i.e. everyone gets a vote and every vote is equal) rating system without people being able to skew the results for many reasons, with many outcomes and through many methods. It just can't work. Personally, I don't see the point in grasping for some utopian solution, when - for me at least - there isn't one to take.

However, people need some kind of feedback on maps, no matter how aloof some of us like to be. I would propose, yet again, that the best way to offer this, would be a combination of comments and visible favourites. The inability to view those who have favourited a map publicly is baffling to me.

This also draws in the obvious point with almost all numa problems, that arachnid is no longer involved day-to-day with numa, and none of the dreamt up features and fixes we would like to see will be implemented until someone, or preferably some people, step forward to offer numa some progression. This point is far easier mooted than solved, appreciably.

--

One last point, those who disable ratings do not always do it purely because they have some beef with ratings in general. In fact, I can't think of a single author who disables ratings on all of their maps. It makes no sense to remove their rating privileges based solely on their preference for their own maps.

(The above isn't proof-read so forgive any mistakes or lack of sense.)

[nevershine]

great post, r_t. I completely agree with you. The only problem is, in my opinion, that most of the people who usually give a "lol awesome map 5 XD" don't use the forums, so they won't come around and read this. There should be a public call on the news page, describing our problems and the solutions.

[im_bad_at_n]

What if rates were not anomalous? Well, not entirely anomalous... What if there was a public view on the 3 of 0,1,2,3,4, and 5's rated? for example a good map can possibly have three 5's, seven 4's, and 2 snipes. Its public knowledge that the average rating, which is here a 15+28+0/12= 3.58 is a 4/5 public rating. But with my suggestion, then everyone can see the original rates that made it a 4/5 and not just the total. Having names attached to the numbers is a bad idea (except for moderators/admins maybe), but knowing what made it a 4 could be a good thing i believe.

In totally in favor of public favorites by the way. for all the reasons already stated. =D

Also I agree with nevershine and the posting this on the home page for the whole community to see & not just the people that go to the forums.

Bringing back 1/2 ratings is the best suggestion i heard (in general, not necesarily here) because then there is a way to give a more accurate rate.

Taking your earlier example as gospel, half ratings do nothing but appease those who've been fighting for their return since NEWma.

I wasnt here for the OLDma. i never saw the OLDma and never participated back then. But I still value the 1/2 rating system as valuable. Even better would be a system to the .1 value, but thats a ways off...

This also draws in the obvious point with almost all numa problems, that arachnid is no longer involved day-to-day with numa, and none of the dreamt up features and fixes we would like to see will be implemented until someone, or preferably some people, step forward to offer numa some progression. This point is far easier mooted than solved, appreciably.

QFE- i have no idea about coding though... what type of browser coding is NUMA now?

[rocket_thumped]

First, thanks to all for your comment and rating (hope it isn't finishing :p).
then I Know that some objects bug, just read the descryption, it's not my fault !!!.

Many thanks to Squibble for your comment, it's what a want as comment, it's an excellent comment ! But i totally disagree with some point and i'm dissapointed you sniped my map ( i think some ppl decide to snipe my map after read tour comment :(). I agree with your explaination but you've rate my map 2/5. It's not justified. 2/5 is for noob level... I agree that my level is not perfect, but i don't think it's a bullshit. Pleaze think at it ;)

This kind of thing is what I'm talking about. Completely illogical thinking, why would anyone even use a 2 to snipe in the first place?

source

[Tunco]

I agree with r_t. What the main problem here (in my opinion) is that people don't do what they need to do, or to describe it more briefly, their chores or have to do list about numa. To make an end to all of this is simple, did you just saw a noobish or spammy map? (Yes, I know you did, keep reading) Then don't leave a comment just saying "lol ur map sucks dude 0" instead, please take your precious time and write something such as; "If you want to get ratings and not bad comments, just spend some efford on your map dude. Look good maps on numa, you will start to make good maps, don't give up because people don't play your maps. Also, you shouldn't use rockets and mines that much, don't spam. Don't use unneeded objects for no reason. You could put that thwump to top right corner of the map though, if could work a lot better..." and leave a comment! This won't take more than a minute or something, except just giving it a 0 [zero] and complain about how bad the map is you could leave a comment to help the author improve himself/ herself so that you won't see more noobish or spammy and bad-looking maps from that author again, and you will stop complaining.

If you want to see more better maps on numa just leave a comment. Then sniping would stop because the snipers are usually the people who get negative feedback from people and 0 [zero] their map. And that would solve the rating problem in a short time. (There could be mistakes in the post, it's not proof-read, but you still get my point)

[Scrivener]

this is awesome. I had not realized we were arguing for that long :D

and to say something quickly about that particular argument, the one where you said I was being a hypocrite; you made the assumption that I was trying to /fix/ the rating system. If one person rating accurately would fix the system, I would do it. In the meantime, if we all work together, we might be able to fix the system. I'll help if we ever decide what we should do.

[Nexx]

If one person rating accurately would fix the system, I would do it. In the meantime, if we all work together, we might be able to fix the system. I'll help if we ever decide what we should do.

First, please change your language. The system does exactly what it's supposed to (which, btw, hasn't changed since the day of its implementation). If a bunch of asshat users come along and abuse the system, the ensuing mess is their fault, not the system's. So if anything's broken, it's the users; the system is working just fine.

Also, yes, the usefulness of the system depends upon how it is used by its users. So yes, everyone should be doing their part to keep it working by not being asshats. All the time. Not because someone else told you to. Not because it was part of a community effort. Because you choose not to be an asshat.

[unoriginal name]

This is a superb thread that should be required reading for all new members of NUMA.

[Ad]

I still can't help but think that people disregard low votes as snipes, as proved in the large quote by someone saying 2 is the lowest vote they'll give. 0 is possibly the most common rating I give, because there be a severe amount of stuff on NUMA that is a complete waste of my time. I don't think I'm being too harsh, but maybe I am.

[Nexx]

0 is possibly the most common rating I give, because there be a severe amount of stuff on NUMA that is a complete waste of my time. I don't think I'm being too harsh, but maybe I am.

It sounds like you're either being ridiculously harsh, or just mean.

Ridiculously harsh: You play normal maps, and if they don't appeal to you, you rate them a 0. Sorry, that's messed up. There's a difference between kinda bad, bad, and very bad.

Just mean: You play nub maps, and rate them accordingly. It's not abusing the system, it's just mean. Seriously, why would you play those maps in the first place? You should be able to tell from the thumb that, in all probability, they're going to suck, and that you should just try playing a different map. On top of that, you then shouldn't rate it a 0 just to sink it because, in this scenario, you haven't played it, and rating without playing is dickish.

[Ad]

It's definitely the latter, but I usually go through all maps of the Hot page, and rate each what _I_ think they deserve. I may have overstated above - I was getting pretty annoyed by the fact that people are afraid to rate lowly for fear of being had a go at (which you proved will happen =D) - but a fair amount are 2 or lower.

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?

[otters~1]

I agree with Ad; I do what he does when I have the time to actually play the Hot Maps page through.