21-Dec-2014, 4:27 AM
Hmm.
That's a lot of levels already. Perhaps the staff needs to think about some other ways to limit the number of levels seriously considered for the set. Just throwing ideas around here:
-Limiting the number of levels submitted per designer, like 149 levels. A designer might not have the same view of their own levels as others, but they could still be able to pick which levels they would be most happy with ending up in a community set, or enlist the help of others to do so.
-Limiting the number of sets submitted by a person. I guess this isn't very different from the previous one and might create extra 'best of sets' but it might weed out something. Yeah, this isn't a useful idea.
-Limiting the people who can submit sets. It sounds unfair, but there could be a simple criteria that could be easily met. In practice this could aim to allow the more active and current members of the community would be the ones whose levels would make it into the voting pool.
-Limiting the types of levels allowed to be submitted. Quality is a hard thing to judge so we'd have to choose some other more specific criteria. It would be good for the set to have a clear goal in mind, like CCLP1 did.
-Limiting the method of how levels are allowed into the submission pool. One way to do this would be to require nominations of individual levels, rather than full sets. There could even be a limit for the number of nominations per person (though this might have some stalling effects due to wanting to see other people's nominations first).
Currently, it sounds like I could make a set with 500 levels of varying quality, ask for it to be included for consideration, leave the community, and come back years later to see how the set turned out and which of my levels made it into the set. This doesn't sound efficient or even fair to the people who would put a lot of work into compiling the set.
Happy Holidays!
That's a lot of levels already. Perhaps the staff needs to think about some other ways to limit the number of levels seriously considered for the set. Just throwing ideas around here:
-Limiting the number of levels submitted per designer, like 149 levels. A designer might not have the same view of their own levels as others, but they could still be able to pick which levels they would be most happy with ending up in a community set, or enlist the help of others to do so.
-Limiting the number of sets submitted by a person. I guess this isn't very different from the previous one and might create extra 'best of sets' but it might weed out something. Yeah, this isn't a useful idea.
-Limiting the people who can submit sets. It sounds unfair, but there could be a simple criteria that could be easily met. In practice this could aim to allow the more active and current members of the community would be the ones whose levels would make it into the voting pool.
-Limiting the types of levels allowed to be submitted. Quality is a hard thing to judge so we'd have to choose some other more specific criteria. It would be good for the set to have a clear goal in mind, like CCLP1 did.
-Limiting the method of how levels are allowed into the submission pool. One way to do this would be to require nominations of individual levels, rather than full sets. There could even be a limit for the number of nominations per person (though this might have some stalling effects due to wanting to see other people's nominations first).
Currently, it sounds like I could make a set with 500 levels of varying quality, ask for it to be included for consideration, leave the community, and come back years later to see how the set turned out and which of my levels made it into the set. This doesn't sound efficient or even fair to the people who would put a lot of work into compiling the set.
Happy Holidays!