Panel Of Judges? Thread

I have observed the moddb.com site for some time now (over a year) and I'm always so amazed at the amount of crappy/retarded/failure mods that are posted daily. I would like to suggest either one of two things.

1. Start the database over, sending out a mass e-mail to all mod team leaders to re-register. Then, with the new database, you hire a panel of quality assurance judges, who review mod submissions, and decide whether or not it's something that will actually get done or not (based on delivery, content and professionalism) and allow mods into the database that way. It'd be a great time to freshen the database, and possibly add a new look to your site, with Half-Life 2 just around the corner.

2. Keep your database, but create a subdomain, or new section somewhere for the highest quality mods, with a news page just for those in the new high-quality section, so you can browse through quality mods, instead of thumbing through 10% complete mods that failed years ago. A panel of judges would probably be required for this option too. Mods that aren't asked by the judges to join the high quality area could still apply, through a submission process (much like the delivery, content, professionalism method in option 1).

Really all I want, is a mod database that actually displays mods that are either 1. Playable, or 2. Potentially playable. I hope you guys understand and at least put some though into my ideas. I'd like to hear your responses.

its called changing the percent completed mainly.

And there is v2 just around the corner. And some mods may eventually fail, but they could still produce in the mean time.

Thats how i always feel about this, but being Intense/staff i cant say anything really. Although someone is going to go through and remove "joke" mods from the db.

Even the most high-quality and anticipated mods eventually fail sometimes, Doofus. Having to restart an entire web site just because you think there's too many dead mods is kind of dumb, to tell you the truth. I'm not going to put my mod on the line for a bunch of idiots to tell me if they like my mod or not, because I'm not making it for them. It's like if you put a movie out and asked a focus group if they like it; you're going to find plenty of wild statements about it and they'll just reject it. Moddb would be a pretty dumb place, and I'd go somewhere else with my mod instead of it being judged by a bunch of people.

Besides, if you're looking for completed mods, go to Mods, and sort by Development Stage. Moddb is going to keep all the mods, no matter what their status is, just so people can come back and either pick up their project again or someone else can gather ideas from those mods.

Basically, I hate your idea for a panel of judges. Nuff said.

Was just a suggestion, and also, I wasn't saying you judge them based on if you liked them or not, you judge them based on their content, as a process of eliminating mods that will probably not come to be. For example, the number of Half-Life 2 mods already registered is huge... My favorite being Fatal Actions, It has the coolest Angelfire webpage, and the coolest storyline I've ever heard...

I seriously doubt that mod will ever see the light of day. My suggestions would simply keep mods like those out of the database, until they had a presentable website, and some sort of content to prove they may be headed in the right direction. (Concept art, Music Tracks, Maps, Models)

Either you can keep allowing random kiddos with Angelfire sites to sign up and take up space, and hinder others' abilities to search through actual mods, or you can come up with a solution, which is what I've attempted to do. I'm in no way saying that a mod shouldn't be allowed on the database, I'm just saying you should make sure a mod exists before it's allowed in.

I'm only trying to help, and suggesting some ideas. I'm sorry if I've offended anyone.

Thanks for the suggestion, but its not gonna happen. v2 will stop the adding of stupid mods. There may be a thing for mods that dont get updated in 6 months or so to be marked as inactive and they will have to contact the staff member who looks after the mod department to get it reactivated (atm its me and bigbird).

Thank god.... or INtense...

I don't think the authenticators can judge a mod and forsee it working or failing.
But there are some mods at moddb that don't deserve the day of light

carni wrote: I don't think the authenticators can judge a mod and forsee it working or failing.
But there are some mods at moddb that don't deserve the day of light

Exactly my point.

hmm, sounds like yerf's judge board. that way, only good mods will make it.

Yerf.com

they had a nifty point system.

That site has some very strict rules, but as you can see the content on the site is good, which is a plus.

My process wouldn't be as strict, it would just be a process of filtering out mods that have no presentable content. Someone without any skills throwing out their idea and hoping a team of highly skilled modders will find their way to them is not how it should be. A mod should be allowed to post news and have a mod profile, when and only when they have something to put into that profile, thus, removing mod profiles that have 0 content.

Get it?

Thanks for the suggestion, but its not gonna happen. v2 will stop the adding of stupid mods. There may be a thing for mods that dont get updated in 6 months or so to be marked as inactive and they will have to contact the staff member who looks after the mod department to get it reactivated (atm its me and bigbird).

There's your answer.

Karuto wrote: There's your answer.

Wonderful, thanks for your input. We're discussing a panel of judges system, thank you for the input.

I also wanted to point out that if a mod submitted, but was turned down, it wouldn't have to be some sort of mean turndown. They could simply say something like "We feel you need more presentable content, feel free to re-apply when you have progressed."

It's not like you reject mods, you simply tell them to progress a little more before desiring publicity (which will be negative anyways until they get some decent content, so you'd really only be helping them by letting them not emberass themselves).

Anyways, thanks for ignoring all of my points Karuto, and just trying to shut me down. But you have no valid points in your opposing argument, all you've done is point out that they don't plan on adopting such a policy. I however, would like to continue to discuss my idea, with people such as Makkon and carni who recognize my idea, and are willing to discuss it.

Thank you.

Doofus: I agree with what you're saying as far as not allowing mods to join the database until they have some presentable content, and as Forkeh said, this is much more likely to be the case in v2.

However, for the sake of data integrity, mods will never be deleted once they have been added, but features may be added so that they can be flagged as "dead" (or something along that line) so the general public does not have to browse through them unless they're specifically looking for them.

I doubt there's a real need for a "panel of judges" other than the administration team though; as long as mods are only added once they have some presentable content, this shouldn't be an issue.

Oh, and play nicely children!
.

Thank you Psycho. I await the "dead" flags.