Changes to soliciting ratings/file of the month votes

[Zumbs]

If you click on the number of :down:, it will be shown why someone chose to not-endorce the file. Last time I checked, you could also see who not-endorced it, so you can PM them and ask for an elaboration.

[JimboUK]

Can we get obligated comments for "I wont endorse this file" ?

 

It is really frustrating for modders when someone clicks on the "I couldn't get the file to work" and doesen't ask for

any help.

 

Just noticed one on the hair thing I done, he/she reckons there are files missing, odd then that no one else has any missing files. Instead of asking he just gave a thumbs down, that annoys the hell out of me. The other thumbs down is from someone who couldn't get it to work, once again they didn't ask for help but went straight for thumbs down instead. How am I responsible for someone elses inadequacies?

[bben46]

Those are the ratings from very immature members, if not actually under age they are mentally under age.

 

I have a 9 year old grandson who attempted to play Oblivion. His reaction after just a few minutes was " I hate this stupid game! ( Not don't like, but hate) "Why would anybody want to play a stupid game like this (Stupid is one of his pet words - his parents are working on that.) "This stupid game doesn't work!" (Not doesn't work for me) And he refused any help assuring me he could do it. when he obviously didn't understand the concept at all - his concept was you should automatically attack the first character you see and expect to kill them at once. The concept of talking to NPCs in a game was beyond his experience. He gave the game a thumbs down - because it was "stupid" and no other reason. HE doesn't have to give a reason for his opinion. However, everyone else is supposed to believe that his opinion is enough reason to pass it by. (Don't play this game because I 'hate' it.)

 

There will always be self centered people who rate low based little or no experience with the mod - that is the reason for the delay on rating - it got rid of a lot of the "I don't like this mod because it is stupid" type ratings. And those people who judge whether a mod is worth downloading based only on if it has a few thumbs down - without looking at the reason given - are not much better. Do you really care if a 9 year old doesn't like (hates) your mod after not being able to make it work (And probably not reading the instructions)

[JimboUK]

At least with the "I don't like this mod because it is stupid" rating the offender could have his rear end kicked, the thumbs down legitimises that sort of behaviour. The thumbs down doesn't benefit potential downloaders because there isn't a way to tell if the person doing the rating is a halfwit or not, you could tell that from the old idiotic comments and the replies to those idiotic comments from members with a functioning brain. It doesn't benefit the creator because it gives no details, it only benefits the same kind of person who abused the old system. I like the thumbs up system, I see no point at all in the thumbs down. If there is an issue with a mod then people should use the comments and give details, if they can't be bothered then tough.

[Vorians]

If you click on the number of :down:, it will be shown why someone chose to not-endorce the file. Last time I checked, you could also see who not-endorced it, so you can PM them and ask for an elaboration.

 

But they ignore you. I tried that, waste of time.

[LHammonds]

If you guys have not already figured this out, ANY system you put in place for the general public to use WILL get abused or misused for various reasons.

 

The thumbs down (and not being counted in top lists) are our way of trying to box the abusers into the same cubby hole without the need to "moderate" every rating. Some of the thumbs down items should be obvious if they are simply there to abuse the system. How can a member who is trying to evaluate a mod before clicking the download button tell? Look at the comments. If there are actual problems related to the thumbs down votes, YOU WILL see them being discussed in the comments thread...by the author who may have corrected the problem or by other members who help other members by explaining how to fix it or by saying there is not really a problem.

 

The thumbs up/down are just a small piece of all the information a member has at their disposal to evaluate if a particular mod might be something they want to try out.

 

As for authors, if you expect to get thorough reviews from those that download and play your mod, don't expect it...at least don't expect it unless you give them some guidance on what kind of feedback you are looking for...such as a questionnaire that you designed and they can copy/paste into the comments to let you know how they experienced the mod. When clicking the "Add Comment," many people are overwhelmed by looking at that menacing black, empty box and do not quite know what or how to express their experience.

 

LHammonds

[Tianshi]

I agree with that decission. People don't just have to rate others coz they've been asked to do so but should go through the post. idid rated some articles once coz i was asked to. i lated went back to read them and realised they didn't merit the rating at all.

[FollowTheGourd]

I'd humbly propose making this no-soliciting policy a little more prominent when uploading your files. There are already guideline notices about what you should upload before you make your submission, and I'm sure not everybody reads this forum as much as they should; I'll admit I didn't even really notice this topic until a while after I had uploaded something after Dark0ne's general invite from the BW site (usually I just try to abide by common courtesy on forums while taking note of things I might have missed).

 

I don't mean for this to sound like whining, but I've seen a few popular projects that seem to have been soliciting votes for a little bit of time now, even though they fully deserve them IMHO - the first post mentioned checks and I assume those and the balances take their time (like when they start appearing in the top-mod lists), so I'm not complaining there, either - just saying that sometimes reading all the rules can be a little daunting at first, even though there might not be a lot of them - or we can just be unaccustomed to them, not having come from the nexus group of sites originally. I suppose I'm hesitant to start reporting left, right, and centre even though that's probably the recommended way - I suppose I'd just feel hostile doing that instead of leaving it up to the capable mods and admins to handle it if and when they think it's becoming an issue, but maybe that's misplaced.

 

If anything, when I came back to this site, I wasn't sure what the difference between voting for a file was and endorsing it (I'm still not sure entirely why it has to be a separate thing - can we vote every month?), so part of the soliciting *might* (and I say might) be trying to simply bring awareness of it instead of only trying to pump up one's ratings. That's not a valid reason, I'm sure, but I'm just trying to be honest about my own naivety and extrapolate on that.

 

Well, I've probably rambled on more than I've meant to, not to mention all the edits now.

[ChaironDeCeleste]

Seems endorsements are still what seperates those with the

plain will to share the game content they've created from

those who additionally intend to feed their ego.

 

I wasn't quite sure in the latest case about the author's method

hence he didn't directly demand endorsements

like some firestarters did in the past.

Anyway I'm grateful for Buddah's moderation there :thumbsup:

 

Maybe making the site policy additionally clear in the file

endorsment popup would spare the moderators a lot of

solomonian decisions when folks ignore the info...

[renzozuken2002]

Personally, I find this whole "No Soliciting" rule kind of pointless. For one, I can't see everyone going "Oh! I should endorse this because he asked me to!"

 

Secondly, in the case of Vigil Vendor, "Updating every 10 endorsements" is a double-edged sword. Noob766 had 124 endorsements, that's 12 updates he was obligated to make. Of course not following through can lead to some negative comments. True, he could not update and keep all the cheated endorsements, but it was uploaded April 9th of 2010, he made 124 endorsements over the course of one month, guy must have been doing something right.

 

Thirdly, who cares if he ends up on FOTM for the one month? If the guy didn't follow through, good chance he is not going to end up on future FOTMs.

 

I know its your site, and the rules are up to you, and having this isn't going to keep me away either, I enjoy playing these mods. But a lot of other sites don't care if you ask for endorsement/subscription/high rating, in the end who really cares so long as people enjoyed it. Maybe the source of the problem is having the FOTM in the first place.

 

Food for thought.