Dont be afraid of changes people, i mean this is to spot some less popular user and they become a master and we need to incurage them.
Do not be afraid to change people, I mean this is to discover some less popular users and because they will not stop building tracks, we have to compliment them with the award, so they think it is worthwhile, to continue to build tracks, what if somebody built a good track, and you get the one award where you can actually lose the urge to build and just drive for it's fun, or it puts you off completely becouse you might just like TrackMania to build tracks, but I'm not saying that this is so, but for some, I think it is so and with a rating system so we can help some anyway but it remains to see, you have to dare to try new things to go forward or am I wrong. ?

2012 is not 1986 we developed for the better hopefully.

to realize that an award is not enough, but perhaps an award and a 5 in rating is more visible than a track with five award and three in the ratings, than another with 1 award and five in the ratings, I think most people choose the product with an award and so maybe it gets more award because of this and you end up in BOTW and the rest of the world sees it. ^ ^

Translated by google
edit: 21:18 swe hope its better now.

SPIDER no offense, but I get nervious when I read your posts.. they seriously lack of punctuation marks.
Do you actually read what you have written before you click the 'Post Reply' button?

All the suggestions for voting systems describe the best-case-scenario. But life is no best-case-scenario.
All downsides are fallen behind to make the idea more appealing. It won't happen.

I'm disgusted by people saying awards are needed. They bring nothing of value to this site, and are actually pretty useless. If someone wanted to give a track feedback and tell the author they liked the track, they could've written a comment about it, we don't actually need these "awards" to do that. It shouldn't be necessary to get awards in order to get attention, and we should really think about other opportunities to make it easier for newcomers to gain attention.
If someone who's unknown and releases a good track, and gets zero attention, it isn't motivating. It can be frustrating to see other people get awards just because they're "famous". Removing awards altogether would not remove this barrier, so it might be a stupid idea, but it would be nice to know how people would react to such a system, because they would no longer be able to order the tracks they play by the number of awards, which I think would be for the better.

It's true that users often choose what tracks to play based on the number of awards. I don't think this is a fault of the system. Users can choose to play whatever tracks they want; they just choose to play tracks that have been previously awarded.

I don't think the awards system is going anywhere, and I don't think it's likely that a rating system will come and compliment it any time soon. Until then, instead of worrying about how other people use the site, try some things you wouldn't normally try . How bad does 1 random track a day sound?

eie says:
I'm disgusted by people saying awards are needed. They bring nothing of value to this site, and are actually pretty useless.

Nobody is forced to download or search for most awarded tracks. You are free to download whatever tracks you want.
How does it help you when there are no awards?

eie says:
If someone wanted to give a track feedback and tell the author they liked the track, they could've written a comment about it, we don't actually need these "awards" to do that. It shouldn't be necessary to get awards in order to get attention, and we should really think about other opportunities to make it easier for newcomers to gain attention.
If someone who's unknown and releases a good track, and gets zero attention, it isn't motivating.

What makes you believe that people who don't get attention/awards will get attention when there are no awards at all?

eie says:
It can be frustrating to see other people get awards just because they're "famous".

Right, because they were born famous.
In TMS I started as newbie with no awards nor feedback on my first tracks. I didn't really build for awards anyway but because it was fun.
When I got the first awards it encouraged me to improve my tracks and get more awards. Several tracks later I landed in the botw for the first time. You don't want to know how long I was working on that track and how many times I changed parts and tested everything to make them better and get an exciting track from start to finish.
Slowly more people got to know my tracks.
It was a long process.
Nobody gets famous out of the blue.

eie says:
Removing awards altogether would not remove this barrier, so it might be a stupid idea, but it would be nice to know how people would react to such a system, because they would no longer be able to order the tracks they play by the number of awards, which I think would be for the better.

Once again, nobody is forced to look for most awarded tracks. It's a fact that they do though. Not because they have no other choice, but because they want to.
People like it easy and comfortable. That's just how it is.

SkunkY says:
SPIDER no offense, but I get nervious when I read your posts.. they seriously lack of punctuation marks.
Do you actually read what you have written before you click the 'Post Reply' button?

All the suggestions for voting systems describe the best-case-scenario. But life is no best-case-scenario.
All downsides are fallen behind to make the idea more appealing. It won't happen.

yes, i do, but i read it now and i change it a little becouse of google translation is not the best, but now i hope its better. lol

SPIDER says:
becouse

Because*
---
Also I still dislike the fact that we tie feedback to awards. Awards are pretty stupid because it makes people put less effort into finding a track, and this means the tracks which already got an award are bound to get more attention, thus more awards. So it's stupid and random. I'd still like to keep it though, I'm just saying it could be improved or something.

I just have no idea how

The system isn't bad. It's how people use it.

And until people make an effort (or even see the need) to change, then things probably won't change.

If just 10 people on the site made an effort to test a lot of unknown tracks (and award the good ones with good feedback), it would radically change what tracks we see in best of the week, in which authors get attention, etc.

It doesn't take that much to change people's behaviour. The majority just need some trend setters to follow.

eyebo says:
The system isn't bad. It's how people use it.

And until people make an effort (or even see the need) to change, then things probably won't change.

If just 10 people on the site made an effort to test a lot of unknown tracks (and award the good ones with good feedback), it would radically change what tracks we see in best of the week, in which authors get attention, etc.

It doesn't take that much to change people's behaviour. The majority just need some trend setters to follow.

That's almost exactly what I've been saying! +1 eyebo!

Is it really true that some people only run good courses becouse they do not want to sacrifice time on a track, which is not sure if it's good. ? I test most tracks with picture, but sometimes without. so remember to always add an image to your track.

I think you can take almost any track, and you will like it, in one way or another, I can almost guarantee.

And one more thing, there are many tracks with one award, and if one likes it, 'Why is there no more that give the user an award. and it has received an award so it must be good in one way or another.

Most importantly, with this page is ...
Do not forget to award the tracks you like, and even post a replay even if it's a bad time, and some more tracks are discovered, becouse it does not matter how a course is, if enough people would submit their time, it would be competition in many more tracks, and as we all know, replays raising and LB and the tracks will rise in value.

translated by google.
Edit: 18:30 by SPIDER