Flash Flash Revolution: Community Forums

Flash Flash Revolution: Community Forums (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/index.php)
-   FFR Songs and Artist Permissions (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/forumdisplay.php?f=63)
-   -   Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 [Regular batch: OPEN] (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/showthread.php?t=116884)

Plan_Bsk81127 10-25-2011 06:09 PM

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

samurai7694 10-25-2011 06:23 PM

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

Originally Posted by LJRoX (Post 3557039)
I vote kommisar for judging

yes me three

qqwref 10-25-2011 06:28 PM

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)
 
Nega-vote, he's given some really sketchy notes in the past :|

ScarletSky 10-25-2011 07:27 PM

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)
 
I like Kommi fine for judging. I know I've asked him to look at a few of mine in the past and I liked what he said.

DossarLX ODI 10-25-2011 08:43 PM

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

Originally Posted by qqwref (Post 3557051)
Nega-vote, he's given some really sketchy notes in the past :|

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

MarioNintendo 10-25-2011 09:11 PM

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

Originally Posted by DossarLX ODI (Post 3557136)
I really have to second this, his notes are very weird

lol, case and point; look at this past review from him:

"Submission Rules [++]

-gjrioafjiordajfioja"


I hold nothing against Kommi. I think he's a judge of experience and knows what he's doing...right?

Yes, he does have his own style... but if he can back up his notes, wether it's by PMs if you want details on your review or in a forum post, this shouldn't be a problem for his nomination...

ninjaKIWI 10-25-2011 09:32 PM

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)
 
I could see that note being a problem if it wasn't a ++... but.

Ziergdsx18 10-25-2011 09:35 PM

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

Originally Posted by LJRoX (Post 3557039)
I vote kommisar for judging

+1

He's one of the few that -should- be a judge imo.

who_cares973 10-25-2011 10:51 PM

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

Originally Posted by qqwref (Post 3557051)
Nega-vote, he's given some really sketchy notes in the past :|

Quote:

Originally Posted by DossarLX ODI (Post 3557136)
I really have to second this, his notes are very weird

Says the people who I'm quoting :roll:

qqwref 10-25-2011 11:19 PM

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 10-25-2011 11:23 PM

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

Originally Posted by qqwref (Post 3557248)
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 10-25-2011 11:38 PM

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 10-26-2011 12:26 AM

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

Originally Posted by qqwref (Post 3557248)
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."


Quote:

Originally Posted by hi19hi19 (Post 3557256)
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 10-26-2011 03:21 PM

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

Originally Posted by qqwref (Post 3557051)
Nega-vote, he's given some really sketchy notes in the past :|

Quote:

Originally Posted by qqwref (Post 3557248)
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 10-26-2011 03:55 PM

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 10-26-2011 06:47 PM

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)
 
Borderline files are considered rejected this batch because of the number of accepted files iirc

bmah 10-26-2011 07:14 PM

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 10-26-2011 09:21 PM

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

Originally Posted by TC_Halogen (Post 3557520)
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 10-26-2011 09:46 PM

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2 (Submission Closed)
 
What bugged me was Felix's reason for ++ The Earth Blew Up...

ninjaKIWI 10-26-2011 09:49 PM

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.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:12 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright FlashFlashRevolution