Bad customers

[Bornwild]

There are so many really bad customs on this site I think something needs to be done to sort out the trash and only keep the good

[Van-Blurten]

I agree with a lot of people that bad customs be removed. The removal being done by the admins, after they try to get the creator to fix it. If the creator doesn't at least respond to them within a week then delete it. If they are working on it, have some sort of advisory notice on the song download page.

 

However, it's all well and good for people to say they are willing to give constructive criticism and advice, but I've been trying to get feedback on a song I have created, with only 1 responder so far on the bass line (thanks @justgimmethefunk ). I have 2 others I will be working on over the weekend and may get around to trying the mob rules again. But it is hard to motivate yourself if you are not getting feedback.

 

Furthermore, I believe that new or repeated bad cdlc creators should not be allowed to upload until they are deemed as good creators. With newbs / bads being tested and approved and uploaded by an admin team, after the songs have been tested on all paths (lead/rhythm/bass) and are generally good.

[bob64]

What if.... we had a mandatory tutorial of some sort.

 

Basic stuff, create an eof file based off a simple sample song. You download said song with maybe like 10 notes on it. You're then walked through on how to create phrases/sections, add notes, add a bend of X strength, add a slide. All the basic techniques needed to make sure it's decent quality and doesn't crash.

 

Here's the kicker: they upload the competed .eof file to some service that hashes and compares with "the gold standard" one. Since the tutorial would guide them step by step, chances are 90% of the completed .eof files would match the "gold standard" file. Bam. New posters now have song posting rights.

[Bornwild]

It boils down to this one user cluttering up the customs with unplayable songs. Thats it. Bad customs sure no problem make a few suggestion and they attempt to fix them. Make a few suggestions and mayber there next one is better. Thats all understandable. But customs that lock up your game and need to reboot or are so far out of sync is unacceptable. Failing to respond it grounds to delete ther customs. This guy is like a litter bug he comes here uploads all his trash and then runs away not to be heard from again till the next time.

[Berneer]

If we keep poor quality CDLC in the database is there any way to allow the upcoming Song Manager to detect the community average ratio of playthroughs/downloads so that if a number is greater than 1 ( or 2 since the first crashed) we know it works and if much greater than 1 we know it's likely reasonable quality?

Probably an unfeasible idea but just a thought since we don't want to discourage new charters with disappointing rating.

To be honest, I really liked the Submitted and Approved categories even if imperfect and even if great songs waited an eternity to get promoted. We know the Approved are good and the Submitted might be good but you feel less disappointed when a Submitted turns out to be a dud because YOU chose to take a risk. Disappointment is proportional to expectation. Plus I'll bet it gets addictive after you get your first Approved. It's fun to aspire and euphoric to notice achievement. Plus cream usually rises because when it is noticed a song is egregiously not yet nominated for Approval, it will be noticed and recommended. The problem I see with that system though is three-fold:

1) only a subset of members (I'm probably not one of them) qualify to really know all aspects of CDLC and music theory and guitar technique and have a good transcribing ear to legitimately pronounce a song as sufficiently good for approval.
2) I guess few songs get approved because it requires one to examine all arrangements and every aspect of the song.
3) one person's approved criteria may be different than another ( great chart, bad tone might bother some more than others)


But still I prefer the Approval system. I did like Mortalo's idea of checking out CS songs as a sort of Approved category of CDLC.

I enthusiastically downloaded over 1500 CDLC. I wonder what % I'll later learn are good. :) or worse, as a low-intermediate guitar player (if that) I play a song, think the song is not very fun to play due to un-optimized charting or think it is accurate when it's not. When the notes rush down the highway you tend to believe what you see, learn it, then realize you need to unlearn it... :)

[firekorn]

The "funny" thing is that this dicussion come over and over an yet the same problem appear, the criteria and the man power needed to get that done.

 

I've stop testing things in my own time because things don't change as much as i would have expected.

 

I would love to pass on my knowledge about CDLC and music and that's why i'm open to people asking about tone creation (only visible for charter) and i would also accept any proposition of collaboration on any CDLC (we do a good job with teinashu on those meets metal cdlc) but nobody seems to care so far.

 

Non-working CDLC can already be hiden/deleted if they are reported to the admin (it's a simple click) and i don't think we need or can do anything more than that at the moment.

[Alex360]

I think vve could force some sort of education required things to start(become a Magna Charter), and allovv only them posting in public cdlc database (as all f*ucking vvorld does about job things), other gyus and gals should pass exams (yes I'm talking about my VVIP project) I think that'll solve most of similar to this problems, like you suggesting, all vvho vvant to post songs should be approved, novv you knovv they vvon't miss a step and could produce a valid dlc,
if you don't pass it you still can post in VVorkshop area (smth like unapproved but vv\o search, vvell you could ask @@ForgeOn or @@Unleashed2k for unapproved\vvorkshop section vvith vvip  cdlc database, but I doubt it)

and this shouln't be bothering too much for magna charters, they already knovv a lot so it's not that hard to pass, just time  consuming, I think It vvold eliminate beginner part for "vvise guys", anyvvay I'd like to developed it vvith you, vvho knovv hovv to do the things ;)

that's my opinion

[Berneer]

Nice Alex, if we don't "approve" songs we can "approve magna charters"

I was also thinking yesterday why ratings failed at Smithy's. I think it is because there was only one all encompassing star-rating. I believe that system would've worked much better if there were 5 ratings per song.

Great song?   *****
Charting         L: ****       R: ***      B: *****      V: **    (n/a for not available)
Tones             L: **.         R: *        B: *****                 (n/a for not available)
Notes synch   L: *****      R: ***      B: *****      V ***    (n/a for not available)
Overall           ***1/2

 --> [Math or weighted average (Synch 45%, Charting35%, Tones 20%) of all above scores except "great song rating"]

By adding "great song?" rating you allow one to get their natural fanboyism out of their system and be more objective on their other ratings.

A song with overall poor ratings but high popularity in the "great song?" rating is an indication to magna charters to either help out a willing, aspiring charter or in the absence of willingness by the charter to improve his offering, for a more able and willing charter to offer his competing version.

There will be trolls but I believe there will be a balancing anti-troll effect. We need to be able to click on a rating category and see the quantity of people who voted for 1-star, 2-stars, etc. If trolling is an issue we could even tie ratings to specific users, still allowing a vote to be anonymous since a friend might shy away from hurting a friend's feelings but seeing a strong score by a respected guy like, say, PC Plum, then many would say to themselves, "if it is good enough for Plum, it is good enough for me despite the questionable low general ratings". Another anti-troll measure can be a forced forum post comment if any rating less than 3 stars out of 5 is made, for the rating to be submitted, otherwise the rating is revoked.

The ratings system needs to be integrated with Ignition and Song Manager since people rarely go to the song OP anymore.

CDLC-related Ratings need to be reset when a new revision of a CDLC comes out (chance for redemption). However Star ratings of at least the previous version (if not all versions) should be archived and readily viewable since when a new version comes out we could check the ratings of the last version as an indication that despite yet few ratings for the new version, the CDLC's newest version is probably good, by virtue of the last version getting good ratings.

An expert in one criteria but not another one can choose which rating he'll judge and not be forced to pronounce his/her judgement on the stuff he/she feels unqualified to judge.

Magna charters, Mods, Developers, CS Organizers, Admins only can (Smithy couldn't do this because we didn't have magna charter labels) rate CDLC. All members can rate if it is a "Great song?"


Just some ideas. I think some sort of quality system is heathy if built upon a solid foundation.

And even if nothing is done to address this, this community is still awesome! Just sharing my thoughts.