Get rid of negative endorsements

[Fatalmasterpiece]

Your earlier posts suggested that even if someone gave a 100 word explanation (which really isn't that big, your post is almost 100 words) and gave the mod 1 star you would still report them (to use your own words) "for the TOS violations that the troll" used. You seem to imply that if someone doesn't like the mod or finds an issue with it beyond a technical one, they should keep their opinions to them selves. Whether or not that is for the best, which is debatable another time, a star rating system still gives people the ability to give a low rating for reasons other than technical aspects. I think the described star/rating system is great, I never said I didn't, but giving a mod 1 star is still like a negative endorsement. Making negative endorsements more complex won't change that they are still essentially a negative endorsement.

 

That said, I think a minimum ap/posts/reg date for ratings is a great idea but it needs to be a standard practice across the board, meaning "positive endorsements" or 5 stars should also have the same requirement. You would see files getting a lot less low and high ratings (though these ratings would have more depth). Not necessarily a bad thing, but just food for thought.

 

Also, since low star ratings would now require greater thought and user activity, shouldn't they actually count toward something? (apologies if that was mentioned in Dark's post) Such as, total score is overall average of all star ratings.

[Eiries]

Fatal: I don't think Arthmoor said anything like that. I noticed you already commented in the recent concrit thread, so I won't link you to it. Bottom line is that there's nothing wrong with giving some legitimate, helpful, courteous constructive criticism if you feel a file deserves it. You may be bettering both the modder and the mod for the community if you do so well enough. If some people get butthurt about it, who cares. The moderators here are more than capable of distinguishing between legit concrit and flaming, and that's all that matters.

 

As for the new system, it will have restrictions as far as who can use it, like Arthmoor said. Thus, only members that are fairly active will be able to utilize it, weeding out a lot of lurkers and trolls. This system will run alongside the endorsement system, not replace it, so there's no negative endorsements there. There will probably be options to arrange mods by either system. It's pretty much a means to provide an accurate, well thought out analysis of a mod based on all of its merits and flaws. In used correctly, it could be quite useful. If exploited, then users have the option of rating the review itself.

 

It's not perfect, but we'll see how it works out when it comes around.

 

(Edited to add a couple sentences.)

Edited March 12, 2011 by Eiries

[baduk]

Hi!

 

I wrote a post earlier but i guess i forgot to click the post button after i was done writing.

 

Oh well.. Anyway it sounds like the new system is still being decided on.

 

I like the idea that there would be a new user group for reviewers. It is difficult to write a good review for a mod. Good quality mod reviews would be a valuable asset to the community.

You need to have some grasp of the rigors of mod making and some technical understanding; also you gotta have good communication skills to produce a review that is helpful for both the author and player. Also the reviewer would be more successful by being familiar with and respecting the established culture of this modding community.

 

Then the written reviews can be commented on and rated by the community and there can be an award for the top reviewer each month.

 

It will take a long time for all the existing mods to get reviewed and modders will have to submit requests for new reviews if they update their files.

I think it is possible with patience and ambition.

[Fatalmasterpiece]

Eiries, so can users rate the review of the review that was just rated? What happens if one rater goes back in time and kills his grandpa, did his rating still get posted? I keed I keed... but really... point being that I think having both systems seems exhaustive, more work for moderators, confusing to noobies and doesn't really solve anything, not to mention reviewing a review... eck. How about, "0 out of 10 users found this review helpful"

 

A simple solution may be to call them reviews instead of ratings (hell that might have been mentioned) just so people who aren't nexus fanatics won't get confused on what's what. Another problem I foresee is obvious, which is keeping reviews up to date with updated file versions, so said version would have to be clearly displayed with the review along with date (obviously). Of course that requires the moder to have a file version in the first place, which a lot of them don't bother with (or even go straight to 1.0 with first release :wallbash: ). So clearly I cannot choose the glass in front of me, but as you knew that, clearly I cannot choose the glass in front of you, yeah thanks for reading this far O.o

 

If it seems like I'm just trying to piss in the pool please see my user title. I think the new system sounds great, as long as Dark doesn't mind I'm just takin the ol thought machine for a spin.

 

Lastly, "legitimate, helpful, courteous constructive criticism" is very subjective. I wouldn't think a little thumbs down symbol would hurt people's feelings that bad but who knew. I foresee many reviews starting off with "the above user's review is wrong" or along those lines. Let's hope I'm wrong (about a lot of things!).

 

 

Yes I understand the problem with only having 1 system in that older files will not adhere to the system.

[Eiries]

That might work. To be honest, it's good to throw around ideas like that because the system hasn't been implemented yet. While a rating system built in to rate reviews (lol, it's funny sounding just saying it) can be clunky and easily exploited, a "# out of #" system would probably be a lot smoother.

 

Hopefully Robin has already foreseen the issues that come with mod updates and is already considering methods of dealing with it. Again, a very valid issue. There's a few different ways of dealing with it, and each one sounds fairly problematic. We'll have to wait and see what happens there.

 

While I don't know how subjective real concrit is (the very foundation of it exists to avoid subjectivity,) the fact of the matter is you're right- people will always get upset when someone tells them they're not perfect. But when you're contributing to a system that encourages rating, comments, etc, you need to be ready to keep an open mind. Right now there's little constructive about the negative rating system, but hopefully that will change over time.

[MythWisper]

Well I liked the 1-10 system but it really had some bad flaws besides being rated a 1 or a 10, people who didn't rate it a 10 even were saw as "insulting the author" or "giving unfair ratings". Honestly i don't see Any 1 to anything system working not because of the system, but of the people using it. maybe if we could be more accepting of a non-10 and people could give more information about bugs/problems/ etc. before rating it a 1 it would work.

[Arthmoor]

Your earlier posts suggested that even if someone gave a 100 word explanation (which really isn't that big, your post is almost 100 words) and gave the mod 1 star you would still report them (to use your own words) "for the TOS violations that the troll" used

 

Nice try, but I never said that.

 

I said if someone came along and posted a 1 star rating with the equivalent of "I'm too narrow minded" as a reason then they'd get reported for it. That's how things USED to work before the trolls were given a free pass to post negative endorsements.

 

Telling a modder their work violates your sense of morality or your priest says it's evil and you should shun it isn't the most productive use of your time or the modder's time. Such a thing cannot be used to improve the mod. Since the whole point of the system is to be able to offer constructive criticism and advice, allowing reasons that are neither to exist is just plain silly.

[Fatalmasterpiece]

Darn... There goes half my evil plan to take over the nexus...

[shunshundedun]

Well I liked the 1-10 system but it really had some bad flaws besides being rated a 1 or a 10, people who didn't rate it a 10 even were saw as "insulting the author" or "giving unfair ratings". Honestly i don't see Any 1 to anything system working not because of the system, but of the people using it. maybe if we could be more accepting of a non-10 and people could give more information about bugs/problems/ etc. before rating it a 1 it would work.

 

1 star doesn't mean narrow mind. It means the mod in question is low in quality, not worth keeping. It a mod does what is says and doesn't have technical issues, does that mean I should upload 10000 mods all similar to say, a mod doing something petty anyone can do using console? Hmm. If that happens this site will be abandoned by the majority. That's how it works whether you like it or not. You honestly don't want a rainment of valor ugly retexture as a file of the month do you? DO YOU?! Only reason people give negative endorsements and not provide feedback is anything said is going to be bashed by everyone. I prefer stating my opinion, if I think a mod is crap I say so and leave it as that. No point going into detail writing a 100 word essay on why it's crap.

[Thandal]

But no need to say ANYTHING at all. Unless either a) the mod breaks something, or b) you have constructive criticms to make, then the rule here is "pass in silence". It may be a terrible mod that does nothing useful and looks bad doing it, but so what?