NARC

[unoriginal name]

I'm not sure if you guys have noticed, but it's been somewhere between weeks and months since I last reviewed a map. This is largely attributable, I feel, to two factors: My growing disconnection with the mapping community in general and NUMA in particular, and the unnecessary hassle of the current queue system. You see, this process that divorces initial action (claiming a date) from the end result (publishing a review on that date) is simply not something I can bring myself to invest the effort in, usually. My enthusiasm for reviewing comes in bursts, these days, which doesn't match well to a system that asks for a low, steady stream of attention. Now, you can certainly say that this is my problem, not the system's, and there's some truth to that. But here's the thing: if we were to return to the original automated queue, I would write more reviews. That system works for multiple forms of attention. I'm still interested in reviewing maps. I enjoy reviewing maps. But I don't enjoy the baggage that currently comes along with it. The way I see it, the only solid argument we had for putting up with the damn unwieldy is we don't have a better option because we broke the original, excellent system. But now we have this golden opportunity to rebuild it, and you, southpaw, are arguing against that because it weeds out the lazy reviewers? Well, I'm a lazy reviewer, I guess, but back in the day I got out my 3 or 4 reviews a month, and I could again, unless we do the stupid thing and keep using this difficult, frustrating construct.

[/rhetoric]

But no, seriously, I can't believe I even have to argue this.

[Destiny]

I'm not sure if you guys have noticed, but it's been somewhere between weeks and months since I last reviewed a map. This is largely attributable, I feel, to two factors: My growing disconnection with the mapping community in general and NUMA in particular, and the unnecessary hassle of the current queue system. You see, this process that divorces initial action (claiming a date) from the end result (publishing a review on that date) is simply not something I can bring myself to invest the effort in, usually. My enthusiasm for reviewing comes in bursts, these days, which doesn't match well to a system that asks for a low, steady stream of attention. Now, you can certainly say that this is my problem, not the system's, and there's some truth to that. But here's the thing: if we were to return to the original automated queue, I would write more reviews. That system works for multiple forms of attention. I'm still interested in reviewing maps. I enjoy reviewing maps. But I don't enjoy the baggage that currently comes along with it. The way I see it, the only solid argument we had for putting up with the damn unwieldy is we don't have a better option because we broke the original, excellent system. But now we have this golden opportunity to rebuild it, and you, southpaw, are arguing against that because it weeds out the lazy reviewers? Well, I'm a lazy reviewer, I guess, but back in the day I got out my 3 or 4 reviews a month, and I could again, unless we do the stupid thing and keep using this difficult, frustrating construct.

[/rhetoric]

But no, seriously, I can't believe I even have to argue this.

I second this. There are plenty of maps I want to review but I often forget that I booked a slot somewhere between deciding it's probably time for me to write a review and the date for which i had booked to write that review. On top of that is that my schedule is somewhat dynamic at the moment, meaning I rarely know which dates i'm actually going to be free - making it hard to book slots at all. If the original system was implemented to NARC I would write many, many more reviews.

[otters~1]

There should be a "feature this" button on top of a map. The maps with the most recommendations would appear to reviewers to review.

koipen said this on one of his rant maps. I think it is a good idea, but what do you think?

Terrible idea. I don't trust, for example, koipen's opinion of a good map. Reviewers do not want to review a map that is thrust upon them.

For the record, I disagree with pawz, agree with Seneschal and would like to say in answer to southpaw that jerrod has completely dropped off the map. He has nothing to do with the queue right now.

EDIT: And now I've gotten to the end of the thread. gloomp was the best reviewer (excepting myself of course) so we should do whatever we can to get him back.

[origami_alligator]

@^^^
which is why I suggested a different system. I don't know if the suggestion was carefully woven into my post so that nobody noticed it but here it is again, with more in-depth explanation afterward.

Although my previous post had mentioned an on-site calendar of sorts, what might be more helpful is for the Reviewers to write their reviews and submit them to be posted on a certain date. In this way we don't have to wait on the promise of a Reviewer to Feature a map nor do we have to create a complex Queue system for the website. Thoughts?

Funny how this was skipped over.

Basically it blends all the great stuff about the old queue with the great qualities of the new queue. I'll break it down very simple in a step-by-step process of how someone would submit a Review.

1. A Reviewer finds a map and selects the button which allows them to Feature the map.
2. That person is taken to the page which allows them to write a Review and submit it to the queue.
3. On the same page will be some sort of setup which will allow the Reviewer to select a date within 30 days from the given day.
4. The Reviewer submits their Review and it is then waiting in the queue. A Reviewer may not change or alter the day which they have selected, but an Admin may delete or change the day of a Review if they see fit.

This does a few things for us, among them:
- Allows administrators to have complete transparency with Reviewers and Featured Maps. They are able to keep overzealous Reviewers from featuring too much and make sure that special days for the community are allowed special Reviews from special people.
- Allows a Reviewer to be as relaxed or as zealous as they like about Reviews, gives them a chance to Feature maps on the days they want and makes sure each map gets exactly 24 hours of attention.
- Creates a system which is simple, functional and doesn't leave someone wondering why their map they featured 3 weeks ago is still being shoved down because of it being randomly sorted among the to-be-Featured maps.

I think this works much better than the current system and the old system. But maybe that's just me?

[unoriginal name]

Oh, that's excellent. I can get behind something like that, I think.

[aids]

One addendum: A Rewiewer could choose to leave the date blank, indicating that the review is a backup and can be used if a day has not been taken. Perhaps a limit to three or so "backup" features would be a good idea to make sure there's not a surplus of them.

[Destiny]

Yeah I think I could go for something like that. So long as it allows me to write and submit my reviews at any point, it's golden in my books.

[chocollama]

For what it's worth, the NUMA I was going to wanted to make was going to have 8tracks' tag set up and possibly it's main layout, Last.fm's stats page (and something like this for tags), and possibly something like Facebook's newfeed.

This.

[Rose]

One addendum: A Rewiewer could choose to leave the date blank, indicating that the review is a backup and can be used if a day has not been taken. Perhaps a limit to three or so "backup" features would be a good idea to make sure there's not a surplus of them.

I would be totally on board with Paws' idea regardless of whether Aidiera's suggestion is implemented, but I like Aidiera's suggestion.

[chocollama]

Somebody might have already said this, but:

The ability to tag your maps with "author:exampleman3000" so that multiple authors can be credited with collabs. One map can have several authors in collabs right? Why only let one person have all of the ratings? It can even have a recent maps bar for each author under the map instead of just fro one author. Idk, I'm really tired. :P

[unoriginal name]

If you are an overweight Christian domestic, you are not alone. Requisition imitation your church high-mindedness rarely: your women's collection, choir, Sunday Denomination caste or fraternity assembly, wherever you participate. Look high at the other women there; are assorted of them overweight? The chap-fallen aristotelianism entelechy is that in most of our churches today, being overweight is not the disapprove of to, but the norm.

There is a common sense you are fat.

You may not elegant to find out it, because the rightly is hard. But we as Christians are committed to the facts in fact, so I urge you to victual reading. The platoon of people who are overweight in arrears to medical problems is a pigmy minority, which means that the loafing of us acquaintance to appearance reality.
Is Being Lucrative A Sin?

The question is how did you net fat? Most of us procure gotten here via committing the vice of gluttony. You indubitably haven't constant heard this huddle in a crave blink, since pastors infrequently evangelize on it anymore.

So then what is a glutton? The "Illustrated Thesaurus of the Bible" (published nearby Thomas Nelson) says a gourmand is a yourself who is debased and unjustifiable in her eating habits, whose lifestyle is disposed to excess. (In fait accompli, the confab "immoderation" can in point of fact refer to covetous overindulgence in any corporeal joy, including eatables, sec, and spending money.) Penny-pinching is the injure of the stupendous gifts Numen has foreordained us to joy in in compulsion, which are to be acclimatized in thankfulness and fealty to Him, all to his glory.
If you are an overweight Christian more safely a improved half, you are not alone. Creme de la creme your church high-mindedness then: your women's organization, choir, Sunday Private seminary caste or coalition assembly, wherever you participate. Look in every nook at the other women there; are divers of them overweight? The shocking aristotelianism entelechy is that in most of our churches today, being overweight is not the debate with, but the norm.

There is a rationale you are fat.

You may not prerequisite to hark to it, because the facts in fact is hard. But we as Christians are committed to the positively, so I brace you to conduct pursuing reading. The manageress of people who are overweight equitable to medical problems is a wee minority, which means that the bootless about of us receive to effrontery reality.
Is Being Overfed A Sin?

The dubiousness is how did you clear fat? Most of us sort out gotten here via committing the misdemeanour of gluttony. You in all chances haven't tidy heard this clump in a big abundance, since pastors on occasions evangelize on it anymore.

So then what is a glutton? The "Illustrated Wordbook of the Bible" (published in advance Thomas Nelson) says a gormandizer is a themselves who is debased and fulsome in her eating habits, whose duration is conceded to excess. (In fait accompli, the warning "edacity" can in actuality refer to immoderate overindulgence in any materialistic indemnity, including eatables, sec, and spending money.) Miserliness is the imprecation of the fabulous gifts Numen has prepare us to get high on in existence, which are to be hardened in thankfulness and fealty to Him, all to his glory.


breast enhancement surgeon New York City
breast reduction surgeons NYC
labia reduction surgery New York City


the best electronic cigarettes

This is my favorite post ever.

[otters~1]

Fuck captcha. This is the post of the year.

Seriously, just reread this -- I couldn't write something this funny if I tried.

[origami_alligator]

Somebody might have already said this, but:

The ability to tag your maps with "author:exampleman3000" so that multiple authors can be credited with collabs. One map can have several authors in collabs right? Why only let one person have all of the ratings? It can even have a recent maps bar for each author under the map instead of just fro one author. Idk, I'm really tired. :P

We already have the ability to add authors. All it requires is confirmation from all people involved to be able to have your author: tag alongside another.

[chocollama]

really? I've tried but it never really worked for me, i think...

[origami_alligator]

really? I've tried but it never really worked for me, i think...

on NARC, not NUMA.

[chocollama]

oh, that makes sense. :D

[Apakenua]

Somebody might have already said this, but:

The ability to tag your maps with "author:exampleman3000" so that multiple authors can be credited with collabs. One map can have several authors in collabs right? Why only let one person have all of the ratings? It can even have a recent maps bar for each author under the map instead of just fro one author. Idk, I'm really tired. :P

We already have the ability to add authors. All it requires is confirmation from all people involved to be able to have your author: tag alongside another.

I was highly pleased at this update. Nice. :D

[origami_alligator]

We need someone who is well versed in Ruby and web development in general to help build this website and update it. Our good friend and head developer, incluye, is burnt out.

Requirements:
- MUST BE AVAILABLE (you will work on this, even if you don't want to)
- ACTUALLY KNOWS WHAT THE FUCK THEY ARE DOING (has the experience needed for web development)
- MUST BE COMMITTED (no dropping out and leaving unexpectedly)
- Has something they could send to incluye or scythe that would impress them enough to think that you would be the right choice for helping create and build upon NARC.

Remember, we are not starting over with this project just because you think you can rebuild this better or more concisely. You can do that on your own time after you've helped us get this off the ground. We just need someone extra to help get this site completely out of the design/development stage and ready for action. If you don't believe you have the desired qualities but know someone who does and would like to add something to their resume//portfolio, please get them on IRC and in touch with myself, scythe or incluye.

There is the possibility of a small monetary gift for your services. It will not be much and nowhere near enough to pay for the amount of work you will undoubtedly put in, but it might help pay for that new video game you've been looking for. MONETARY GIFTS ARE AT THE DISCRETION OF SOUTHPAW AND SCYTHE AND ARE NOT A GUARANTEE.

For those of you who would like to help out in other ways, DONATIONS ARE WELCOME. Contact scythe about our PayPal account.
For those of you who would like to help without donating your money or services, please donate your time! We need more bug/error reports, or any information regarding the website which will help us to fix it more accurately and in a timely manner.

Thank you all, I hope to see this website fully functional with your help by the autumn equinox!
-NARC-

[Sunset]

Here's what I found:

• Some profiles are broken with their map counts. Mine and apakenua are the ones that I know of but I know there're a lot more.
• Some maps are broken, I think you know this already.
• I don't think this is a bug, but you can view people's account numbers.
• When you post a comment, it goes under "Recent Maps from this Author".
• Hot maps is still under construction, I assume, but some of the days work an some don't; higher up ones don't.
• Some of the featured maps don't work because of the 'featured' tag.
• 'Next page' only goes to the first page.
• Can't post mappacks at all (or maybe my formatting is wrong?)
• Posting a map breaks the site for me.

I might add more if I find more.

[origami_alligator]

Here's what I found:

• Some profiles are broken with their map counts. Mine and apakenua are the ones that I know of but I know there're a lot more.
• Some maps are broken, I think you know this already.
• I don't think this is a bug, but you can view people's account numbers.
• When you post a comment, it goes under "Recent Maps from this Author".
• Hot maps is still under construction, I assume, but some of the days work an some don't; higher up ones don't.
• Some of the featured maps don't work because of the 'featured' tag.
• 'Next page' only goes to the first page.
• Can't post mappacks at all (or maybe my formatting is wrong?)
• Posting a map breaks the site for me.

I might add more if I find more.

This is great so far. Thank you!
As for map packs, that is still under construction and should have been removed as an option until we had it up and running. It is going to be a critical thing for NARC to have full map pack support, it is just a matter of how we separate packs from maps without messing up the Newest page as well as allowing for ratings in some fashion.

WHICH IS WHY WE NEED A NEW DEVELOPER WHO CAN DO THIS SORT OF THING FOR US.

[Apakenua]

There should be a "feature this" button on top of a map. The maps with the most recommendations would appear to reviewers to review.

koipen said this on one of his rant maps. I think it is a good idea, but what do you think?

Terrible idea. I don't trust, for example, koipen's opinion of a good map. Reviewers do not want to review a map that is thrust upon them.

For the record, I disagree with pawz, agree with Seneschal and would like to say in answer to southpaw that jerrod has completely dropped off the map. He has nothing to do with the queue right now.

EDIT: And now I've gotten to the end of the thread. gloomp was the best reviewer (excepting myself of course) so we should do whatever we can to get him back.

The 'feature this' button could be used to give reviewers suggestions for feature-able maps. If the reviewer doesn't agree that any of the suggested maps are feature-able, he could choose one for himself. It could be just a way to get amazing unnoticed maps noticed. Then again, multiaccounters could have fun with that. But personally I think the pros outweigh the cons.

[origami_alligator]

The 'feature this' button could be used to give reviewers suggestions for feature-able maps. If the reviewer doesn't agree that any of the suggested maps are feature-able, he could choose one for himself. It could be just a way to get amazing unnoticed maps noticed. Then again, multiaccounters could have fun with that. But personally I think the pros outweigh the cons.

My thoughts on this:
1. People with good intentions and have a good idea about what makes a good map will press the button.
2. People without an idea of what makes a good map will also press the button, only 10 times more often.
3. Reviewers will use this for about a month, until it becomes diluted with subpar maps.
4. It will become a useless tool.
---

To solve these 4 issues one has pretty much created Bitesized all over again, in that we would have to hand-pick the people who elect maps for Reviewers to notice. Bitesized maps were the majority of the maps Featured when the Featured Maps system was first introduced. I still see no problem with them living side-by-side, but some people don't like that idea for some reason.

[Kablizzy]

Bahahaha. Anyone remember SuperNUMA?

[Apakenua]

The 'feature this' button could be used to give reviewers suggestions for feature-able maps. If the reviewer doesn't agree that any of the suggested maps are feature-able, he could choose one for himself. It could be just a way to get amazing unnoticed maps noticed. Then again, multiaccounters could have fun with that. But personally I think the pros outweigh the cons.

My thoughts on this:
1. People with good intentions and have a good idea about what makes a good map will press the button.
2. People without an idea of what makes a good map will also press the button, only 10 times more often.
3. Reviewers will use this for about a month, until it becomes diluted with subpar maps.
4. It will become a useless tool.
---

To solve these 4 issues one has pretty much created Bitesized all over again, in that we would have to hand-pick the people who elect maps for Reviewers to notice. Bitesized maps were the majority of the maps Featured when the Featured Maps system was first introduced. I still see no problem with them living side-by-side, but some people don't like that idea for some reason.

I see what you're saying. I wouldn't mind Bitesized maps alongside the Featured maps. Heck, it sounds like a good idea. But that's just my opinion.

[smort]

The problem with this is, I don't see anyone using this regularly until all the bugs are worked out and features are added that separate it more from NUMA. However, I don't see bugs being worked out and big features added until people start using it.