Reimplement the Map Cap

[Nexx]

Link: http://nmaps.uservoice.com/pages/genera ... ission-cap

The problem: I can go to NUMA right now and submit the same map ten times, thereby pushing everything (aside from well-rated maps) off of the first Hot Maps page. Nobody would like me for it, and the mods would give me hell for it (and maybe suspend me or something), but my 10 maps/copies would still be sitting there on the first page, wasting everyone's time.

This shouldn't be possible. It's not that the response of the mods isn't enough (even if they could and would delete all but one, for example), it's just that the situation shouldn't be allowed to occur from the get-go. It's easier for mods and users alike.

I propose a cap on the # of maps a user is allowed to submit within a given time (or within a given number of total site submissions). Both values are open for discussion, but as an estimate, I might suggest 3 maps max within either 10 hours or, say, 30 total map submissions for the site. Also, this could be a hard cap (further map submissions will be rejected) or a soft cap (like NUMA's old system of delaying the appearance of the map until later).

Notes:
(1) This initial proposal is directed at preventing exploitation, not necessarily at (for example) stopping nub mappers from posting 3 different nub maps back-to-back. Not that that's not a bad idea, but that's not this proposal.

(2) The lack of a cap is, as I understand, a policy decision by the architects of new NUMA. The reason given for it was that if a good mapper submitted 3, 4, 5 fantastic maps all in a row, nobody would be complaining. That's true. Unfortunately, the feature can be easily abused, and IMO that overrides the potential benefit (which is minimal since a good author would still submit those good maps, just not all at once).

Discuss.

[KlanKaos]

I entirely agree.

I saw this being discussed in a couple of the threads that have cropped up recently, and I thought it was a great idea. I'm glad you made this post. Just a couple points:

If we have a soft cap, we can't have it done by submission number. The two would conflict. The ones that were being posted later than they were submitted would simply bump other maps farther back on the queue, which could result in a problem.

Also, I think that having a brilliant mapper submit five maps at once is actually a problem. I mean, sure nobody minds seeing those on the hot maps page - except for the people who got their maps knocked off the page because of those five maps being submitted. After all, the whole idea behind this is something that people on NUMA already do out of general courtesy - stop maps from getting knocked off by having a 2/hotmaps page limit. So basically, I'm thinking that the feature is not being abused by those people (though it IS still abused by others), but that it's just a badly-implemented feature (or lack thereof).

That's my two cents so far. I'm totally behind you.

[SkyPanda]

Here's a reply from N uservoice, it's probably old/redundant now:
"Extremely difficult to implement in App Engine, but a rate-limiting system will be put in place instead."
I asked what the hell that meant, nobody replied.
Your idea of a 'hard cap', Avarin, might be an easier to implement system.

[origami_alligator]

It's not that the response of the mods isn't enough (even if they could and would delete all but one, for example), it's just that the situation shouldn't be allowed to occur from the get-go. It's easier for mods and users alike.
...
Discuss.

Actually, we can and will. Obviously complete deletion is not possible, but mods and admins alike can delist maps like crazy.

As for discussion, I think it's about time I discussed Arachnid's token-bucket system that he was planning to implement, which we discussed for quite some time one night.

It is a simple idea: Every 24 hours a user receives 3 tokens, with a maximum of 3 tokens available. When a user submits a map, one token is removed from their "bucket" and won't be replenished for 24 hours. if I believe he was working on this system because it was easily implemented with AppEngine, though I could be wrong. He may have run into some trouble along the way though.

My thoughts on this idea are that it is a simple and effective idea that could work well with AppEngine, but the numbers need to be changed.

Here's my proposal:
Every 12 hours a user receives 2 tokens, with a maximum of 3 tokens available. When a user submits a map, one token is removed from their "bucket" and won't be replenished for 12 hours. Maps will have a "hard cap" where the map is rejected by NUMA after tokens have been used up.

When Arachnid and I were talking I thought that it would be a great idea to have this feature be toggled by admins and moderators. What would happen is that if a user was being abusive enough to warrant an offense without warranting a ban, a moderator/admin would be able to prevent receiving tokens for a period of time up to 2 or 3 days for a moderator and up to an unlimited number of days for an admin. This could not only be used to prevent spam but as a decent warning for users.

Opinions? Comments?

[Spawn of Yanni]

I came here to say how I've changed my mind about the idea (if I remember right, I was initially against reimplementing the map cap) but Jeeesus, southpaw, that sounds great.

[George]

When happened to the old cap? The one where you could submit as many maps as you wanted in any given time frame, but only two appeared on the first page?

That was the effective cap for the majority of old NUMA's lifetime.

[Nexx]

Love that concept, Southpaw! :)

When happened to the old cap? The one where you could submit as many maps as you wanted in any given time frame, but only two appeared on the first page?

That was the effective cap for the majority of old NUMA's lifetime.

I believe SkyPanda has it right: the old soft cap would be very difficult to do on the app engine. A hard cap is not as nice for those that submit enough maps to hit the limit every now and then, but it gets the job done.

[blackson]

2 maps on the hotmaps page is fine...

[Pheidippides]

southpaw's rendition of Arachnid's idea sounds fantastic, although I like 24 hours better than 12. Nobody needs to submit as many as 5 maps in 24 hours (i.e. go into a day with 3 tokens, use those up, and then get and use 2 more after 12 hours). This token-bucket idea would slow down map submissions no matter how it is implemented, so there's no need to give someone the ability to submit that many maps in that short a time because there would be less traffic to keep up with.

Having a longer wait between submissions also forces a user to consider their submissions for a little while, which (in a perfect world) would allow newbies to spend more time on their maps and improve somewhat. That's probably wishful thinking, though.

[lord_day]

I don't like this idea. While I understand that users sometimes place too many maps onto the hot maps page at once, it's nothing the mods can't and haven't taken care off. And there have been times where I have legitimately submitted more than 3 maps in 24 hours. At one time, I submitted 102 maps in 2 hours. But I was responsible about it and delisted them all as they were submitted until a time where they wouldn't be on or near the hot maps page. Perhaps what I am saying is that members who have proved they are responsible can have this limitation removed, OR, that users who have used all their tokens can submit maps that will be automatically delisted for, say, 24 hours.

[Pheidippides]

Maybe for a case such as yours, you could contact an admin for a temporary exception to the token rule? I guess it depends on which is easier to code/implement: a consciously-enacted exception or an automatic delist (followed by an automatic relist). Also, I think providing a complete and permanent exception to well-behaved users might lead to too many exceptions to the rule, in which case the token rule becomes solely an anti-noob device.

[otters~1]

I say reimplement and make stricter. Too many maps are submitted per day. Few ratings/comments are given to most maps. So, how about just one map per user per day? It sounds strict, but it is guaranteed to cut down on the amount of maps submitted, hopefully leading to more comments and feedback. You may say "Some mappers submit genuinely good maps, and more than one per day, and it's not a problem; this is too strict." But would it really kill anyone on this site to only submit once a day? Most of you guys submit way too many maps anyway.

[lord_day]

One map is far too few per day. Sometimes I submit maps in pairs so that they are together. Also, refer to my previous post where I mention the time that I (responsibly) submitted 102 maps in 2 hours.

[Nexx]

Maybe for a case such as yours, you could contact an admin for a temporary exception to the token rule? I guess it depends on which is easier to code/implement: a consciously-enacted exception or an automatic delist (followed by an automatic relist).

Apparently Arachnid already mentioned that the soft cap (which you're basically trying to achieve with automatic delist/relist) is implausible on the site as it's currently set up. On the other hand, every user would have their own bucket to begin with, so I doubt it'd be that difficult to manually edit a specific one. So in l_d's case (submitting a mappack responsibly), he'd notify a mod (or administrator, depending on who was in control of this) and they'd add an appropriate number of tokens. This sort of thing is best left unspoken, though. We wouldn't want people harking the mods for extra tokens.

Also, I think providing a complete and permanent exception to well-behaved users might lead to too many exceptions to the rule, in which case the token rule becomes solely an anti-noob device.

Anti-new-user device, to be more specific. I agree with the first part of the sentence, though. Also keep in mind that things like, for example, the Stacey thing that just happened recently would start popping up. I'm saying that even older users would abuse their exceptioned status now and then. Let's just keep it simple - the rule should apply for everyone (except when there's a particularly good reason for it).

I say reimplement and make stricter. Too many maps are submitted per day. Few ratings/comments are given to most maps. So, how about just one map per user per day? It sounds strict, but it is guaranteed to cut down on the amount of maps submitted, hopefully leading to more comments and feedback. You may say "Some mappers submit genuinely good maps, and more than one per day, and it's not a problem; this is too strict." But would it really kill anyone on this site to only submit once a day? Most of you guys submit way too many maps anyway.

It shouldn't be any stricter than it needs to be. I agree with Pheidi that nobody should be submitting 5 maps in 24 hours, and that 3 maps in 24 hours is plenty. Any more than that and you're likely spamming or submitting low quality maps. Those who aren't will either have to chill out or try to get an exception.

[SkyPanda]

I say reimplement and make stricter. Too many maps are submitted per day. Few ratings/comments are given to most maps. So, how about just one map per user per day? It sounds strict, but it is guaranteed to cut down on the amount of maps submitted, hopefully leading to more comments and feedback. You may say "Some mappers submit genuinely good maps, and more than one per day, and it's not a problem; this is too strict." But would it really kill anyone on this site to only submit once a day? Most of you guys submit way too many maps anyway.

Having lots of maps submitted to NUMA's database is a good thing. The problem is making sure that the page that displays the submitted maps, the hot maps page, is as fair as possible. That's why a queue system is the best possible system.

[blackson]

I think that the only reason people are mad about it is that the spam of maps are all horrible ones. If they were good quality maps, nobody would be complaining. I still think that the 2 maps on a page is a fine limit, but to just make the float and sink system a little bit stronger. This way, good maps stay on the page, even when alot of people submit maps. I don't like the #of maps in a given ammount of time idea, because that's just too much control. This place thrives on a laid back attitude, and a simple adjustment to the hot maps system would fix it.

I hate to keep linking this everywhere, but nobody seems to read it. It has more of what I think should happen to the float system.

[origami_alligator]

Apparently Arachnid already mentioned that the soft cap (which you're basically trying to achieve with automatic delist/relist) is implausible on the site as it's currently set up. On the other hand, every user would have their own bucket to begin with, so I doubt it'd be that difficult to manually edit a specific one. So in l_d's case (submitting a mappack responsibly), he'd notify a mod (or administrator, depending on who was in control of this) and they'd add an appropriate number of tokens. This sort of thing is best left unspoken, though. We wouldn't want people harking the mods for extra tokens.

I'm not sure if Arachnid thought of automatic delisting and relisting or if he was talking about implementing his old system of a soft cap. According to him the old system won't work but I'm curious to know if he considered developing a code that automatically delisted maps and relisted them after 24 hours. If that was possible to do then it would certainly solve a great deal of spam and would save users like lord_day a lot of time in delisting and relisting maps.

I think that the only reason people are mad about it is that the spam of maps are all horrible ones. If they were good quality maps, nobody would be complaining. I still think that the 2 maps on a page is a fine limit, but to just make the float and sink system a little bit stronger. This way, good maps stay on the page, even when alot of people submit maps. I don't like the #of maps in a given ammount of time idea, because that's just too much control. This place thrives on a laid back attitude, and a simple adjustment to the hot maps system would fix it.

I hate to keep linking this everywhere, but nobody seems to read it. It has more of what I think should happen to the float system.

People would still complain that their maps don't get attention either way. The argument would go from, "There are so many shitty maps that my map deserves more attention," to, "There are too many maps overshadowing my maps that they aren't getting any attention." Both end up with an agreement that a cap on the number of maps you can have on the first or second page would be best.
And as for your link, I think the reason nobody wants your idea implemented is that it doesn't actually solve the issue of map spam. It doesn't stop people from making terrible maps. What you need to realize is that fighting spam needs to be done by preventing spam, not making maps float higher above the spam. Additionally, you keep linking your topic in threads where it has no real purpose. Your idea just gives more weight to map ratings, especially N-arts and DDA's eventually preventing them from staying up on the top of the page for too long, instead of tackling any real day-to-day issues.

[Vuntic]

I say reimplement and make stricter. Too many maps are submitted per day. Few ratings/comments are given to most maps. So, how about just one map per user per day? It sounds strict, but it is guaranteed to cut down on the amount of maps submitted, hopefully leading to more comments and feedback. You may say "Some mappers submit genuinely good maps, and more than one per day, and it's not a problem; this is too strict." But would it really kill anyone on this site to only submit once a day? Most of you guys submit way too many maps anyway.

I would like this to be modified to "You may only submit one map as a listed map per day. When you submit a map, there is a checkbox to make listed or unlisted, and it remembers your previous setting."

Although it isn't quite the same, I recall a prominent Hen Tie site implementing a hard cap of 1 image per author per day; the effects of which have effected its current prominence.

[Arachnid]

I say reimplement and make stricter. Too many maps are submitted per day. Few ratings/comments are given to most maps. So, how about just one map per user per day? It sounds strict, but it is guaranteed to cut down on the amount of maps submitted, hopefully leading to more comments and feedback. You may say "Some mappers submit genuinely good maps, and more than one per day, and it's not a problem; this is too strict." But would it really kill anyone on this site to only submit once a day? Most of you guys submit way too many maps anyway.

I would like this to be modified to "You may only submit one map as a listed map per day. When you submit a map, there is a checkbox to make listed or unlisted, and it remembers your previous setting."

This is more or less what I was thinking, but the problem is that unlisted maps aren't just supposed to be invisible on the 'hot maps' listing, they're supposed to be all-but-invisible. And if the system re-listed them after 24 hours, spam would suddenly reappear for anyone paging back through the hot maps listings to look at previous submissions.