Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

[who_cares973]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

Nega-vote, he's given some really sketchy notes in the past

I really have to second this, his notes are very weird

Says the people who I'm quoting

[qqwref]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

I don't claim to be the best judge, but when I see reviews that basically boil down to "[-] a few parts have wrong rhythms" or "[?] not a bad file but seems overlayered" or "[?] file's not bad, some jump parts are debatable" or the infamous "[-] very well made file but the song is too short" I think I'm qualified to notice a problem.

And yeah, sure, you could PM him or complain to jimerax. But if you're relatively new and someone totally ruins your file's chances of acceptance for a small or subjective thing like that, what do you think are the chances you will have the confidence to think you are right and one of the most well-known and liked stepartists is wrong?

[justin_ator]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

But if you're relative new and someone totally ruins your file's chances of acceptance for a small or subjective thing like that, what do you think are the changes you will have the confidence to think you are right and one of the most well-known and liked stepartists is wrong?

lolderp kinda how I feel, though I know the problems with my file were legitimate in most cases. So discouraging not getting files in >.>

[hi19hi19]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

Would it be possible to put the old notes in the Batch Review Thread in spoiler tags? The [code] tags cause it to stretch the screen and it's screwing with the layout.
did you see how I tried to divert the topic from kommi right there? pro move, you can thank me later when I save someone from getting banned over discussing him lollllllllllll

[bmah]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

I don't claim to be the best judge, but when I see reviews that basically boil down to "[-] a few parts have wrong rhythms" or "[?] not a bad file but seems overlayered" or "[?] file's not bad, some jump parts are debatable" or the infamous "[-] very well made file but the song is too short" I think I'm qualified to notice a problem.

Actually, I've been noticing this for the hard batch notes already! It's a bit concerning to me, but I'll go into more details once I get more notes later on.
If the song is "boring" for instance, you better say something more objective to that position you're taking. e.g. "It's boring because the song and file is repetitive, leaving little more to step than 8th jumpstreams."

Would it be possible to put the old notes in the Batch Review Thread in spoiler tags? The [code] tags cause it to stretch the screen and it's screwing with the layout.
did you see how I tried to divert the topic from kommi right there? pro move, you can thank me later when I save someone from getting banned over discussing him lollllllllllll

Good idea. I'll fix this now.

[TC_Halogen]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

Nega-vote, he's given some really sketchy notes in the past

I don't claim to be the best judge, but when I see reviews that basically boil down to "[-] a few parts have wrong rhythms" or "[?] not a bad file but seems overlayered" or "[?] file's not bad, some jump parts are debatable" or the infamous "[-] very well made file but the song is too short" I think I'm qualified to notice a problem.

Not entirely. A file can have these mistakes multiple times in such a way that a judge doesn't want to have to repeat themselves so many times to explain that problem. If a file seems overlayered in a number of spots that comes out to well over half of the file in duration, then it's a worthy reason to dock that many points. It should be CLEAR that this is the sole issue of the file, though.

This isn't to say that there are a large number of problems with a given file, but you have to at least see the file before contesting it. Same thing goes with over-inflated ratings, like with a file last batch that I'm nearly 100% certain wouldn't have made it had Silvuh actually been a judge in that particular scenario. Judges need to look thoroughly at files for mistakes, even if they are minor because they still are technical errors.

Also, why is there complaining going on about this batch? More than 60% of the files went through.

[bmah]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

There's no complaints on acceptance rates as far as I'm concerned. The results are taking forever to finalize however. A decision on borderline files haven't even been made yet (thereby postponing the final list of accepted songs).

[who_cares973]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

Borderline files are considered rejected this batch because of the number of accepted files iirc

[bmah]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

That's one option, but it appears that the borderline files will indeed be looked at.

[qqwref]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

Not entirely. A file can have these mistakes multiple times in such a way that a judge doesn't want to have to repeat themselves so many times to explain that problem. If a file seems overlayered in a number of spots that comes out to well over half of the file in duration, then it's a worthy reason to dock that many points. It should be CLEAR that this is the sole issue of the file, though.

Maybe in some other context, but in FFR batches giving a [-] means the file is basically auto borderline at best no matter what other judges said, and a [?] is almost as harsh. If you're going to give a rating like that, there had better be a good reason, and "I wish this file/song was longer" is NOT a good reason. And honestly, if the entire file has really serious layering issues or is totally wrong in rhythm, the judge should say that. When a judge writes that a file's problems are "debatable" or in "a few parts" it tells me that the chart is generally fine and only has minor or subjective problems. If someone gives such a low rating for something like that, then IMO they are either trying to game the system to personally kill a file they don't like, or they have no clue how the rating system works - and either way, they shouldn't be judging.

[XxMidigamixX]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

What bugged me was Felix's reason for ++ The Earth Blew Up...

[ninjaKIWI]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

What bugged you about it? You don't really need a reason for a ++ anyways... the ++ says it all.

[XxMidigamixX]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

What bugged you about it? You don't really need a reason for a ++ anyways... the ++ says it all.

but it needs to stand out...a picture of the earth blowing up is not enough lmfao.

[ninjaKIWI]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

but it needs to stand out...a picture of the earth blowing up is not enough lmfao.

What? It needs to stand out? I don't know what you're saying. Go on about how GOOD the file is, and which portions were the best? A waste of time. The ++ says everything that needs to be said.

[psychoangel691]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)

You know what, I'm tired of this whole "so and so shouldn't be a judge" "this person should be a judge" "if you can't do this or that you shouldn't judge" etc, etc. Frankly NONE of us are perfect judges. Every single one of us has made a mistake while judging before. Kommi made his mistakes too. It seems that no matter what happens or who judges, no one will ever be happy.

This batch had to be one of the highest acceptance rates we've had in a batch and STILL people are complaining.

Let me ask something, how many of you would want to play a song that's 3+ minutes long and was pretty much the same thing over and over and over again. Most of you would find that boring no? But if we point that out technically it can be considered subjective but frankly I don't think the majority of the community would want to play something like that. I think it's fair to say that most of us try our best to be as objective as possible, and I'm fine with things not being perfect, but a line has to be drawn somewhere.