Moderator: Cartographers
thenobodies80 wrote:We've set a scale of values, each value determines a disciplinary action.1st Abandoned Map - Informal Warning and a spanking
2nd Abandoned Map - Official Warning
3rd Abandoned Map - 6 months of ban from mapmaking
4th Abandoned Map - 6 months of ban from mapmaking
5th Abandoned Map - Permanent ban from mapmaking
ManBungalow wrote:thenobodies80 wrote:We've set a scale of values, each value determines a disciplinary action.1st Abandoned Map - Informal Warning and a spanking
2nd Abandoned Map - Official Warning
3rd Abandoned Map - 6 months of ban from mapmaking
4th Abandoned Map - 6 months of ban from mapmaking
5th Abandoned Map - Permanent ban from mapmaking
I don't agree with this, as it only serves to deter potential map-makers. And, as ever, map-making is voluntary. Why should we ban a user from doing something voluntary which can only be:
A] Of no consequence (is abandoned)
B] Beneficial (new map)
An abandoned map causes no harm to the community. Perhaps 10 seconds of mod time to move the map thread to the recycling bin, and some peeved users who have invested comments during the map development, but the mods/contributors are volunteering similarly - they don't have to spend time commenting on maps which may go on to be abandoned.
Besides, even an abandoned map can be useful.
A map idea should be a map idea, and no one user should be limited to 5 ideas (then banned). And an idea is often best illustrated with a draft. To be honest, the qualifying 'first stamp' criterion for a map development which can then be punishable ("mapmaker is subject to this [disciplinary] system for each map that will receive at least a stamp") if abandoned would only serve to make me shy away from getting the draft stamp.
Not to mention that real life can get in the way of map development.
Oneyed wrote:ManBungalow wrote:thenobodies80 wrote:We've set a scale of values, each value determines a disciplinary action.1st Abandoned Map - Informal Warning and a spanking
2nd Abandoned Map - Official Warning
3rd Abandoned Map - 6 months of ban from mapmaking
4th Abandoned Map - 6 months of ban from mapmaking
5th Abandoned Map - Permanent ban from mapmaking
I don't agree with this, as it only serves to deter potential map-makers. And, as ever, map-making is voluntary. Why should we ban a user from doing something voluntary which can only be:
A] Of no consequence (is abandoned)
B] Beneficial (new map)
An abandoned map causes no harm to the community. Perhaps 10 seconds of mod time to move the map thread to the recycling bin, and some peeved users who have invested comments during the map development, but the mods/contributors are volunteering similarly - they don't have to spend time commenting on maps which may go on to be abandoned.
Besides, even an abandoned map can be useful.
A map idea should be a map idea, and no one user should be limited to 5 ideas (then banned). And an idea is often best illustrated with a draft. To be honest, the qualifying 'first stamp' criterion for a map development which can then be punishable ("mapmaker is subject to this [disciplinary] system for each map that will receive at least a stamp") if abandoned would only serve to make me shy away from getting the draft stamp.
Not to mention that real life can get in the way of map development.
I think this new abandoned system valids only for maps which already has any stamp, not for ideas.
Oneyed
ManBungalow wrote:And, as ever, map-making is voluntary. Why should we ban a user from doing something voluntary which can only be:
A] Of no consequence (is abandoned)
B] Beneficial (new map)
An abandoned map causes no harm to the community.
ManBungalow wrote:but the mods/contributors are volunteering similarly - they don't have to spend time commenting on maps which may go on to be abandoned.
ManBungalow wrote:To be honest, the qualifying 'first stamp' criterion for a map development which can then be punishable ("mapmaker is subject to this [disciplinary] system for each map that will receive at least a stamp") if abandoned would only serve to make me shy away from getting the draft stamp.
ManBungalow wrote:A map idea should be a map idea, and no one user should be limited to 5 ideas (then banned).
ManBungalow wrote:Not to mention that real life can get in the way of map development.
chapcrap wrote:As far as the punishment goes, I agree with it. We do something similar with tournaments and it works fine. Lindax set it up quite a while ago and it prevents users from wasting TDs time and players time with tournaments that do not finish. We also have a tournament rescue policy, like the maps have now it seems. So, I think this is good work.
chapcrap wrote:Well, I would move the Atlas out, because as is, it looks like it is under Beta maps. Which, is really the opposite...
greenoaks wrote:how many of our current mapmakers got their first idea all the way to Quenched ?
how many would have received a ban for the early attempts before their current success ?
ender516 wrote:greenoaks wrote:how many of our current mapmakers got their first idea all the way to Quenched ?
how many would have received a ban for the early attempts before their current success ?
These are fair questions, which could be answered with a bit of research. Now, who has the time? I am tied up a bit right now, working on Map Rank.
ender516 wrote:greenoaks wrote:how many of our current mapmakers got their first idea all the way to Quenched ?
how many would have received a ban for the early attempts before their current success ?
These are fair questions, which could be answered with a bit of research. Now, who has the time? I am tied up a bit right now, working on Map Rank.
greenoaks wrote:how many of our current mapmakers got their first idea all the way to Quenched ?
how many would have received a ban for the early attempts before their current success ?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users