Idea! Thread (Post Suggestions to Help Site Here)

[Mariolee]

I've noticed there has been an upswing of new ideas to help reinvigorate the site. Ronthis. To help not to congest the forums with all of them.

What to Do
Post any new ideas or suggestions, please be as thorough as possible. Once you post here, I will update this OP with links to the post. Any existing ideas already made into threads, I will have already linked. Here, you can also discuss the ideas and their effect.
I will organize them by Users, and popularity of the idea.

Current Ideas

Koopadasher
VGBA Cup 2011 Rating: Popular
Rating System, with (Helpful) Comment Required Rating: Popular
Mod Abilities to Delete Boxes and Delete Threads Rating: Popular
VGBA Game Library Rating: None
Rank Cap to Rate Boxes (Rank 5) Rating: Popular


Ronthis the Werewolf
RYB Rank Seperation Rating: Unpopular
Artist Spoitlight based on Faves Rating: Unpopular

Sentroavium/Throavium
No Ranks or Faves Rating: Medium

Mchapra
User's Personal Featured Box on Front Page

[Ronthis the Werewolf]

Rating: Unpopular

Oh gee thanks...

Just kidding, good idea to make this. It might help a little...

[KoopaDasher]

Oh, what the hell:

Rating System, with Comment Required: Personally, I may see a box that is very well-done technically, but just not my favorite on the site, for various reasons. Maybe it's simply not for a game I personally enjoy, or I would have preferred a different template. If we had a rating system, I could give that box a high Rating, without having to fave it. As it is, I feel guilty for not faving a good box simply because I may not like one aspect. Having a comment to be required, and showing the rating above/below/next to it would prevent anonymous down-rating of boxes.

Mod Abilities to Delete Boxes and Delete Threads: Short of a mod going AWOL, we trust our mods to do the right thing. That is, to delete boxes and threads only if they truly deserve it. As it is, mods are unable to delete boxes from the main page, and can only close threads (to my understanding). They should be given more "powers".

VGBA Game Library: I've noticed that, for many games, there may be three, four, or more entries in the box database for a given game on a given console, simply because of the way the game's title is spelled. One person may upload a box for "The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess" whereas another person might upload a box for "The Legend of Zelda Twilight Princess" making it difficult to search for boxes for a given game without having to check every section. I propose a system that allows the creation of a single "folder" for each game upon its release. These "Folders" could be created by a user or mod upon the first entry of the game into the database, and could be subject to editing by mods. This would ensure that the title is properly spelled, making sure that any boxes for that game go into a single section of the site, rather than several.

[Spiderpig24]

Commenting required should have been implemented a long time ago. I completely agree with that Koopa. A rating system to go along with all of this would be great too. Being able to categorize all of the boxes for each game would help organize things as well, and the ability for mods to be able to delete boxes is a necessity. I like all of those ideas, especially the ranking system.

[KoopaDasher]

We had the Rating System back in the day, along with a Top 20 for the best-rated boxes on the site. It was removed prior to the introduction of the Hall and Fave system sometime in the summer of '07, I believe... or maybe '08. Anyway, the system was finicky, and it was common to see a very good box receive a rating far less than it deserved simply out of revenge or jealousy, mostly because it was completely anonymous. It was impossible to know who actually gave the rating, and if they didn't add a comment, no way to know WHY they gave a rating. So I say commenting should be required to make a rating. It would help with the severe shortage of comments on the site, prevent "Bad" ratings without reason, and give a new incentive to artists. So your box didn't get as many faves as you expected? No big deal. It still has an average rating of 4.8/5 from 35 ratings. You still know you made a good box.

[Spiderpig24]

It seems like making a comment required would eliminate the revenge or jealousy aspect of it, and it would help the users much more than just a fav.

[TrevOwnz]

The old system sucked. People would rate you 1/5 because they didn't see the effort you put into your work and it would kill your boxes overall rating. I don't think people should be able to give bad ratings.

The popular unpopular thing is pretty bad idea. That is just another reason to put good artist or forum whores on a higher level than everyone else. A lot of good artist aren't popular because they don't cry to be mod, rant about sonic or most 10,000 forum posts for every box they make.

This will put a lot of talkers in the popular, not the designers.

[RoarShark]

The old system sucked. People would rate you 1/5 because they didn't see the effort you put into your work and it would kill your boxes overall rating. I don't think people should be able to give bad ratings.

You should have to justify your ratings.

[TrevOwnz]

You should have to justify your ratings.

but look at that tron box posted recently. Some noob posted 3/10 because he feels the front is to much of a wallpaper when we all can see the effort put into it. It isn't just a wallpaper. He brought the speed bikes or whatever closer to the middle, added the characters on the sides, added the arches in the skies and the logo with a custom template to go with it.

Now if you posted that to argue the wallpaper comment you are digging for a better rating making yourself look desperate. So you have to argue all the bad ratings unless you don't care.

[Ronthis the Werewolf]

but look at that tron box posted recently. Some noob posted 3/10 because he feels the front is to much of a wallpaper when we all can see the effort put into it. It isn't just a wallpaper. He brought the speed bikes or whatever closer to the middle, added the characters on the sides, added the arches in the skies and the logo with a custom template to go with it.

Now if you posted that to argue the wallpaper comment you are digging for a better rating making yourself look desperate. So you have to argue all the bad ratings unless you don't care.

Good point...

[Hatty]

Agreed, I've seen too many fabulous essence boxes where a new user has posted "no effort, there's not even an ESRB"

[KoopaDasher]

but look at that tron box posted recently. Some noob posted 3/10 because he feels the front is to much of a wallpaper when we all can see the effort put into it. It isn't just a wallpaper. He brought the speed bikes or whatever closer to the middle, added the characters on the sides, added the arches in the skies and the logo with a custom template to go with it.

Now if you posted that to argue the wallpaper comment you are digging for a better rating making yourself look desperate. So you have to argue all the bad ratings unless you don't care.

So you add a Rank cap. You have to be Rank 5 or better to Rate. That helps anyway, because then people that still want to bring down a box can just make several alt accounts and give comments plus a bad rating to explain their reasoning. I would say by Rank 5 most users can distinguish between effort and lack of effort.

The Rating system would really just be in place as a method to gauge the quality of your art. At the moment we have faves, but as I explained in my first post, having a fave from someone and getting a good rating are not necessarily the same thing. I can see the effort in YoshiStar's DKCR box. I think he did a wonderful design. But I don't like his template, and I wish he would have left the design on the original Wii template. I addressed these comments, YS preferred his design as is, and I don't feel like I want to fave it as is. However, I would still give him a good rating for the box if the system was available. I see it less as another Hall, and more as a quantitative means of judging your overall quality. So in the end, what does it really matter if someone gives you a low rating? It doesn't mean anything under a new system.

[Ronthis the Werewolf]

I would say by Rank 5 most users can distinguish between effort and lack of effort.

NOT true, there could be some 5 yr old kid with 100 shit boxes and be rank 5, or someone that hasn't made a single box, and has 50 author faves, being sarahtaylor, which would make him around rank 5.

[KoopaDasher]

NOT true, there could be some 5 yr old kid with 100 shit boxes and be rank 5, or someone that hasn't made a single box, and has 50 author faves, being sarahtaylor, which would make him around rank 5.

Can you name one person on this site that has made 100 shit boxes without improving? Just one? Anyone that has stuck around this site long enough to get to Rank 5, whether they themselves have improved tremendously or not, would have an idea of what a "good" box is.

As for Sarahtaylor... she can't comment or rate, so what does it matter?

[Ronthis the Werewolf]

As for Sarahtaylor... she can't comment or rate, so what does it matter?

I meant her author faving someone 50 times to make them rank 5, not her own rank.

[RoarShark]

As for Sarahtaylor... she can't comment or rate, so what does it matter?

She can't do that now anyways, she's banned.

[Ronthis the Werewolf]

She can't do that now anyways, she's banned.

Um, she still does it, every time you try to author fav someone, you author fav her.

[KoopaDasher]

Regardless of what Sarahtaylor can and cannot do, what are the chances of someone making a bot specifically to author fave someone 50 times, just to get their rank up so that person can then go around giving people low ratings? Does ANYONE care about this site that much?

Adding a Rank minimum for Ratings fixes the issue, whether you put the cap at 5, 7, or 18. And as I said before, it wouldn't be like a new Hall system. You wouldn't go commit suicide if someone gave you a 1/5 rating because they didn't like your wallpaper, because the Hall system would still be in place. This would be a separate system that would just allow for a more precise, closer look at where you stand in terms of quality. It would in no way affect your Rank, or your chances for Hall.

[Spiderpig24]

I meant her author faving someone 50 times to make them rank 5, not her own rank.

SarahTaylor was rank 0, so she wouldn't have made anyone raise any at all.

[slimd1995]

Can you name one person on this site that has made 100 shit boxes without improving? Just one?

I could name one. I'm not going to though, because I'd feel like a dick.