Having a closed election cuts off any ability for a better system even being possible. If both of the "candidates" can only come up with patch work or mediocre solutions then why ostracize the rest of the community from voicing their opinion or pitching an option?

I look at recently posted to see if there's anything interesting. The fact that the only criteria I can search by are meta metrics (Name, creator name, number of games etc) and almost useless mesa knowledge (number of players and Size withstanding). Rather than anything about the map itself doesn't help me to find maps that I would find enjoyable, a lack of measured comparison makes finding maps that would otherwise be similar or enjoyable very difficult and throwing a blanket over it and pretending its not there doesn't help.

Curtailing the ability to upload doesn't either as most people are not going to go through the work of filling out an application for a game they play in their free time. Especially if they have to wait a day or two to be approved or the reviewer denies their map for personal taste reasons (people will inevitably be subjective afterall). It may instead be better to make the application opt in to gain a mapper/modder tag that is attached to any maps you make. (This shows that you have consistently made quality maps)

But that doesn't answer the question about the election terms nor on the position availability outside of current council members. Currently the way it looks people just voting themselves into power unless I'm misunderstanding your statement.

If possible I'd like to make a suggestion, instead of nuking the map vault why not use a merit based tagging system?
Instead of a simple vote which people pretty much never use (myself included) either make a prompt that appears somewhere prominent (in the corner tends to get ignored because its pretty small.) From there you have a list of tags which work like descriptors that are found on maps like reclaim heavy, dynamic, astrogap, expansion heavy, etc etc. Then after someone plays a match they have a prompt to vote on it and pick a few descriptors for it which is then displayed on the vault listing. It would make finding map types way easier.

I dont know how easy it is to do but what little programming I know it doesn't sound impossible.

Duly noted

I think posting your ideas in simple bullet points would be easier at this rate. Going back and reading this from top to bottom would take an hour best case scenario. So if possible please clean this up and make it easier to read.

I would support biass' position here. Its not a perfect solution to the problems but its better than hiding all the maps. It is kinda hands off but whether thats a good thing awaits to be seen.

Duly noted

Because they have opinions like it or not. Astro is a "shit" map as far as I'm concerned but there are people who play it 20+ times a day, im pretty sure they like the map.

I can link mine to you if you're interested? Also do you have a concise description of your proposal posted somewhere I can take the time to digest?

@biass I've actually proposed solutions in the current discussion about the vault in another thread. Personally I dont intend to run for council but closing off the option makes little sense because if it can be shown that the person can't do the job then they won't get the job. Locking it to two people from the same circle (not saying you have the same idea) does not look good. Its the whole Democrat Republicans thing you got two choice when the system is supposed to have more.

But that doesn't answer the question about the election terms nor on the position availability outside of current council members. Currently the way it looks people just voting themselves into power unless I'm misunderstanding your statement.

I just noticed my paragraph split in half at some point, yeesh. But I didn't say you can't upload with your system I'm saying that it will keep people from wanting to even try. I've uploaded only 1 map onto the vault and that's because making good maps take time (it's not easy) but if I find out I have to make 3 and then send them in for a CHANCE to get uploading privileges is pretty ludicrous and would dissuade most people from even attempting to make maps. Quote below for emphasis.

@Morax said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:

How to be given access to the vault?

Good question, and there will be an application process made. I am thinking a sample of 3 maps uploaded to the vault with replays that the M&M team can review to see it meets the rules.

After that, the author will be given unlimited access, so long as they keep abiding to the rules of the vault.

@MadMax said in M&M Map Vault Plans for Fall 2020 and On:

i don't think handing out good boy badges will stop the flow of crap into the vault

It's wont stop people from uploading but it does highlight good uploading criteria and makes finding maps that are uploaded by vetted skill mappers easier. Most people don't know who makes the map they're playing on unless there's a text popup on screen. This will at a minimum give them a way to actively search the vault with ease.

I look at recently posted to see if there's anything interesting. The fact that the only criteria I can search by are meta metrics (Name, creator name, number of games etc) and almost useless mesa knowledge (number of players and Size withstanding). Rather than anything about the map itself doesn't help me to find maps that I would find enjoyable, a lack of measured comparison makes finding maps that would otherwise be similar or enjoyable very difficult and throwing a blanket over it and pretending its not there doesn't help.

Curtailing the ability to upload doesn't either as most people are not going to go through the work of filling out an application for a game they play in their free time. Especially if they have to wait a day or two to be approved or the reviewer denies their map for personal taste reasons (people will inevitably be subjective afterall). It may instead be better to make the application opt in to gain a mapper/modder tag that is attached to any maps you make. (This shows that you have consistently made quality maps)

Having a closed election cuts off any ability for a better system even being possible. If both of the "candidates" can only come up with patch work or mediocre solutions then why ostracize the rest of the community from voicing their opinion or pitching an option?