yeah something new anyway^^
haha eyebo we almost started to write at the same time those long comments ^^ "only 1 minute between"

and one more thing if a track has 100 awards and have 1.2 in rating that will for sure raise some players eye brows (i think 63 with 1.2 rating = fun track/must try track ) and it maybe will be the funniest track of the week hehe

add funniest track of the week (most award ofc) ^^

63 1.2
51 1.3
50 1.3
and so on

Well said eyebo.

SPIDER says:
haha eyebo we almost started to write at the same time those long comments ^^ "only 1 minute between"

wow!

SkunkY says:
Well said eyebo.

Thanks

my mate gilby just had a sweet idea.
how about awards are hidden on the tracks until you post a comment or award. then you have no idea whether a track is doing well or not.
a strangely different idea.

^^ yes thats me,

Players would only be able to see how many times the track had been downloaded.
It would be up to them to make their own judgement, Comments and Awards wise.

I do have another idea though: (that could be used with my above idea)

Ratings system:
*Every track starts off with 1.000 Rating, which is neutral standing.
2.000 Maximum standing, 0.000 Minimum standing.
*People can vote good to increase rating / bad to decrease rating (this could be incorporated with Xaesco, via ingame karma votes?)
*If the track reaches 1.500 Rating, the ability to Award the track is opened up - Why have the restriction? - to stop players in 30 odd player clans throwing rewards out for free. (if the track later dropped below 1.500 rating) Awards that were already there would stay, but further awards would not be able to be processed.
*Tracks that reach 2.000 Rating, permanently stay at 2.0 These tracks can not decrease in rating, and may be showcased.
* The amount of rating the author recieves would be based on percentage, im not great at maths so someone else can work that one out!

*If my idea: "how about awards are hidden on the tracks until you post a comment or award. then you have no idea whether a track is doing well or not." was incorporated along side this, Then all people would be able to see was the track ratings, whether the track be showcased or in the recently uploaded section.

This is just an idea, to be developed or forgotten.

Gilby says:

*Tracks that reach 2.000 Rating, permanently stay at 2.0 These tracks can not decrease in rating, and may be showcased.

This part is a little troubling. If the first person to vote gives the track a 'good,' then it's 2.0 forever... right?

Other than that, this sounds like a pretty good system, if not a pretty extreme change to the site^^

Jet777 says:

Gilby says:

*Tracks that reach 2.000 Rating, permanently stay at 2.0 These tracks can not decrease in rating, and may be showcased.

This part is a little troubling. If the first person to vote gives the track a 'good,' then it's 2.0 forever... right?

Other than that, this sounds like a pretty good system, if not a pretty extreme change to the site^^

Thanks for finding the bug in my suggestion I havent many ideas on how to change that, ermmm...

the first 10 votes count for .100, or something like that?

One more try, then I give up..

Taking a server ranking over to mx makes no sense.
Server run certain kind of tracks - competitive tracks, raceable tracks. Furthermore servers run only a relatively small portion of mx-tracks.
What about all the rest?
What about hard tracks? Why would you give bad rating to a hard track? On a server it makes sense. When 8 out of 10 players can't finish a track within the given time its not suiting the server. On mx that's of no interest. Anybody can try offline as long as they want to.
What about platform tracks, puzzle, other kind of concept tracks?

So just showing a rating could be ok along with the dedimania records but of course not making awards or mx-ratings depending on server ratings.

Now just some sidenotes.
The next problem would be - which server would you take as reference?
Because there is no Xaseco-rating for tracks. There are only server rankings. All servers that are running the Xaseco plugin have their own rating. So a tracks rating can and will vary depending on the server it's running.
Plus not even by far every server is running Xaseco. Some very popular server have always used their own plugins.


Ok, how about the rest of this idea.

... says:
*If the track reaches 1.500 Rating, the ability to Award the track is opened up - Why have the restriction? - to stop players in 30 odd player clans throwing rewards out for free. (if the track later dropped below 1.500 rating) Awards that were already there would stay, but further awards would not be able to be processed.

So the first people cannot award just because they came first? That's silly.
And what you have to realize is that when people want to trick a system, they will find a way.
And it would be so easy to trick your system. All these "players in 30 odd player clans" would have to do is to give good ratings until the track reaches 1.500 Rating, then "throw rewards out for free". Wow, that was easy, wasn't it?

... says:
*Tracks that reach 2.000 Rating, permanently stay at 2.0 These tracks can not decrease in rating, and may be showcased.

What's even the idea behind this?

... says:
* The amount of rating the author recieves would be based on percentage,

While it would be easy for the coder to make an average out of votes, this:

... says:
im not great at maths so someone else can work that one out!

is a good example for many many ideas thrown out from various people who had some mental orgasm sharing their ideas before spending a second thought on them. Then coming up with more and mor side-rules and filters and forgetting about the fact all that stuff has to be coded by someone and then has to be calculated by the site-database which needs server power and bandwidth.
No offense dude, I'm just picking up on the latest idea, it could have come from anybody.

The idea about hidden awards, that's something imaginable, although it would completly change the character of the site because you could no longer have the lists on the frontpage. 'Latest Awards', 'Best of the Week', 'Recent TMX Supporter Tracks'.
Thus, don't expect it to happen.

the rating shows how good or fun a track are

close to rate 1 is a fun track is my guess it feel so right now and rate 5 is a superb almost perfect track if not perfect the thing about just show rating and have hidden award was kinda cool but i dont think that is a good idea award tells if a track is good and make 2 track diffrent (see below) i dont award a track becouse it have 50+ award i notise that track and maybe try it and award it and about overrated track not exist becouse its we the player how award if we like a track and if we give award we like the track (i not know but i guess som people dont award becouse they think the track is overrated but again there is no overrated track imo so dont let the award level deside for you to give or not to give the award that is wrong and with rating its more accurate i give award even if a track has 1000+ award dont make a diffrent the point is i like the track so i give my award and with the rate system even not the best tracks gets award some times and have a chance to let more people to find it ^^ so all that only give award to perfect tracks can stop that and give award to a less good tracker and award with rating 1 instead but it still got the award and that author is happy

a award tells me that you like my track and a replay show me that you like my track

award and rate is about geting notice so more people find the best track

42 rate 4.7
42 rate 4.8

if you like chicken nothing can change that
@ Gilby : download dont tell if the track is good

eyebo says:
Motivation for Awarding
Length of Award Comments
Sometimes I feel like writing a lot. Usually I only feel like writing a few words. Sometimes I feel like only a smiley. In any case, the award itself is my way of giving a thumbs up to the author that they did some good work. After you've played and awarded thousands of tracks like me it's very hard to say something original, and I tend to want to say nothing at all rather than sounding repetitive.

That's the problem with tying feedback and "some sort of rating" into the same system which we call awards. You might want to show a little appreciation to the author, but at the same time, you don't always want to write feedback, and that's why it might be a good idea to separate awards and feedback. But at the same time we don't want a rating system that makes people the opportunity to never give feedback at all, so we cannot separate them completely. Even if we don't want a rating system, it would be nice to separate the two, and give people the opportunity to award without writing anything.