That completely undermines the objectivity of the program, so the answer to that one is no. Any even though mapmakers are allowed to review other people's maps (and from the stuff in foundry may have some backdrop on a map that the general public wouldn't), I still want to minimize the outside influence.edbeard wrote:I think you should at least give the cartographer of the map being reviewed an opportunity to say something about the map.
I'd like them to be able to say a couple paragraphs about how they envision the map being played. Then, afterwards, they are shown the review and are given an opportunity to respond to it.
Only a bit.lord voldemort wrote:you are a map makert-o-m wrote:Well im not one to follow rules, () so, im still in as stated before - only for testing and commenting on gameplay.
Let me refer to my decision above:t-o-m wrote:Only a bit.lord voldemort wrote:you are a map makert-o-m wrote:Well im not one to follow rules, () so, im still in as stated before - only for testing and commenting on gameplay.
And i don't see why making a map is all that bad - it doesnt make me have a special bias opinion on things...
That means I'm letting mapmakers in, but they won't be allowed to rate their own maps unless we really end up short staffed, and, to the extent we have open group communications, they will be expected to respect a Chinese wall between the people who are reviewing their map(s) and keep their opinions to themselves until the review of their map is complete. This will add to the integrity of the review. After the review comes out, if anyone doesn't like it, whether they are part of this workgroup or not, they can complain to me about it. If I detect bias that anyone, mapmaker or otherwise, is giving a free pass to any map, or being unduly harsh for that matter, with other peoples maps due to bias or prejudice (and I don't mean race here folks), they will be asked to leave the group.gdeangel wrote:Someone asked me why I am openning this to all ranks, and I said that I felt comfortable that we could spot questionable test reporting / reviewing because there will be redundancy (i.e., a couple of people working on each map), and if someone doesn't know what they are talking about, we'll figure it out pretty fast. And after thinking it over, the same thing should be true for mapmaker bias, so I'm prepared at this point to have a go at letting in mapmakers.
you should know that you arent allowed to advertise in GD!!MarVal wrote:Hello gdeangel,
Perhaps its an idea to make an announcement (thread) in the General Discussion Forum what you are doing right now of forming a Social clan of map reviewers in the Join/Create a Clan sub-forum. So then you can lead every interesting member to your thread:
And for the information of you all I wanna say that all Usergroups, Social clans and Competitive clans at this moment will be in the sub-forum Join/Create a Clan. Maybe in a later stadium of clan development it will have its own sub-forum, but I'm not sure of that.
- New group - map reviewers [forming][social][workgroup]
Feel free to PM me, if you still have questions.
Grtz
MarVal
Code: Select all
Member Position attachment rec’d
-------------------+--------------------------+---------------
1. gdeangel leader/editor-in-chief -na-
2. foregone [TBD] N
3. dittoeevee8888 Editor N
4. AndyDufresne [TBD] N
5. t-o-m Tester N
6. Natewolfman Tester N
7. decoulombe [TBD] N
8. poptartpsycho18 Tester Y
9. lanyards [TBD] N
10.lord voldemort [TBD] N
11.BaldAdonis [TBD] N
12.hulmey [TBD] N
13.Lazy_Pilgrim Editor N
14.cena-rules [Tester] N
15.GrimReaper. [TBD] N
16.jnd94 [TBD] N
17.max is gr8 [TBD] N
pending:
wcaclimbing [observer?] -na-
Night Strike [observer?] -na-
