{"content":"\n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Hoshimegu Mio<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,101 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed July 2020<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Hoshimegu Mio<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-08-19T10:58:21+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Didn't someone mention that veto systems have to be consistent in all modes...<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n DeviousPanda<\/a>\n\n \n Elite Mapper\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 345 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed September 2014<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n DeviousPanda<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-08-19T10:59:44+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n agree with all of thisbut regardless of the outcome of this post something needs to change, vetos are becoming obsolete anyways as no bns are going to go near the veto system when you have the chance of becoming a community pariah by doing soas for vetos systems being consistent cross mode, community backlash to standard mode vetoes is the catalyst for the veto system becoming unusable (and correct me if im wrong but i havent seen any significant community backlash from other mode vetos), so it makes sense for the veto system to be changed for standard alone to address this<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by DeviousPanda<\/a> 2024-08-19T11:22:12+00:00<\/time>, edited 4 times in total.\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Ryuusei Aika<\/a>\n\n \n Elite Mapper\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,125 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed January 2016<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Topic Starter\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n \n Ryuusei Aika<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-08-19T11:04:03+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n YyottaCat wrote:<\/h4>Didn't someone mention that veto systems have to be consistent in all modes...<\/blockquote>My opinion on is in 2) of the \"Possible concerns and my answers to them\" part<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Nevo<\/a>\n\n \n Global \n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,192 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed November 2015<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Nevo<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-08-19T11:11:39+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n So obviously I agree with this since I wrote tweet and been saying it for a while but I do think there's an issue ofHow does a mapper know what has to change or what steps do they need to take to make map rankable.<\/strong>Maybe a remediation after changes? If the original nuker agrees it's enough now? If the original nuker thinks it's enough changes and one of the bns thinks it's still awful can it be renuked?<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Lasse<\/a>\n\n \n osu! Alumni\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 3,648 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed June 2011<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n Lasse<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-08-19T11:18:20+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n lets make this more fun by instantly kicking anyone whose nomination gets nuked<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n modules<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 32 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed January 2021<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n modules<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-08-19T11:20:04+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n Doesn't this exacerbate the current issue? Makes power tripping even worse if a BN can just nuke it with no prior notice. The problem with Bang Bang was that there was practically zero discussion or attempt to find a middle ground before sending in the veto. You should never allow such a \"zero communicative effort\" veto. It allows for DQing maps out of spite and causing harm regardless of if the BN will get warned afterwards.<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n aesth<\/a>\n\n \n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 37 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed January 2016<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n aesth<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-08-19T11:22:44+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n DeviousPanda wrote:<\/h4>regardless of the outcome of this post something needs to change, vetos are becoming obsolete anyways as no bns are going to go near the veto system when you have the chance of becoming a community pariah by doing so<\/blockquote>i kind of fail to see how this fixes \/ addresses it in any way? people will still witchhunt the person who \"nuked\" the beatmap because the reason they are angry is that it delays ranking. in fact, i personally think that making it not have any sort of text associated with it might get people even more frustrated as there would be no justification attached to it. the original post mentions that it isn't a kneejerk solution but honestly i believe that such a system cannot exist and that this is just a hopeful band-aid solution when the fact of the matter is that if the map already reached qualified no amount of mental gymnastics or \"prettifying\" will prevent the general playerbase from being upset if they do truly want it to go throughyou could argue that \"having it be reflected in the bn eval\" would prevent this but this kind of also assumes that enough of the bn team reflects the current views of the playerbase at any point in time (subjective, but sounds unrealistic)<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by aesth<\/a> 2024-08-19T11:33:42+00:00<\/time>, edited 1 time in total.\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n KeyWee<\/a>\n\n \n Beatmap Nominator\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/a>\n\n \n <\/i>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 304 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed July 2017<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n \n \n \n KeyWee<\/a>\n\n \n 2024-08-19T11:36:30+00:00<\/time>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n \n \n I agree with the addition of a nuke button. But I feel that lowering the nukes agree rate to 70% with 60% participation (to what the current veto system is), and then making vetos 60% agree and 50% participation would be much more balanced and fair.Personally I feel that getting an 80% agree in the current state is already very difficult to reach, maybe even impossible, and 70% sounds more like of a reasonable threshhold. Expanding on the idea of why 80% agree may be impossible, when a group of BNs that likes certain maps votes to not nuke a set compared to the other groups, the set would pretty much have a garenteed immunity from being nuked. And having an average of around 10 or or people disagree on a set would instantly stop the nuke which seems unfair.It technically does make sense that it should be much harder to nuke maps because a nuke should be used for extreme cases or to where the map is just not being a rankable map with obvious or arguable issues. But lowering the agree % would encourage the push of quality a little more imo.^(Quick edit but I think a system to where having both a veto and nuke would be best.)<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n Last edited by KeyWee<\/a> 2024-08-19T12:03:25+00:00<\/time>, edited 3 times in total.\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/span>\n <\/div>\n \n Ryuusei Aika<\/a>\n\n \n Elite Mapper\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/a>\n\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n <\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n \n \n \n 1,125 posts\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n\n \n ed January 2016<\/strong>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n \n 5g4t6t