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

Thanks for letting me know. Spam no more now.

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

I sent some fixes as well. Just replace the folders you currently have with what I sent.

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

Sent in fixes for Finder and Mahou no Fu...make sure you use this Mahou no Fu or else people are gonna get mad.

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

updated SAP list.

15++ = 4pts
15+ = 3pts
15/14+ = 2pts
14/13 = 1pt

Queue/conditional list isn't updated yet.

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

I vote kommisar for judging

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

I second this

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

nope

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

yes me three

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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...

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

I could see that note being a problem if it wasn't a ++... but.

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

+1

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

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

Says the people who I'm quoting :roll:

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?

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

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

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

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

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."


Good idea. I'll fix this now.

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.

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.