Replies: 10 comments
-
I feel like there have been a lot of things that we identify for automation checks that result in the pre-rejection of an entity that we disagree on between a lot of people in the team. I'm wondering if we could expand on this and maybe have another flag enum, something like |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I think having another field for flags as needed would be a great idea. @cytusine0 / @SourMongoose I am curious what your thoughts are on this one. Are there any current rejection reasons that you feel should just be "flags" (alerts) instead? A flag in this case would not automatically mark the item as rejected, but would have some indicator during the review process. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Well it could also apply to things that we've axed from automation checks or that cytusine / sour weren't exactly the most keen on. For example we could reimplement the regex name check on matches, but it could be added to this new flag instead of being a reason to reject the match. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Yeah that's a great idea. Shall we make a feature tracking issue for this then? (Actually, we can just convert this issue into that) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I'd like to hear cytusine, sour, and alix opinions on this first but I'm on board. Mainly would like to hear as many use cases for this as possible. Mainly because this means that we will have to re-run automation checks on all tournaments now :D |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Wouldn't mind a separate "warning" flag, definitely see the regex check failing as part of this new flag then. Is there a full list of rejection reasons somewhere? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
The main other "useful flags" I can think of are
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@cytusine0 First 1 I think is very doable. Perhaps just SR and duration are fine for now. The second one I don't think is very doable or practical. This would be something manual review covers, ideally. In my head, these flags would be private to reviewers. I am unsure whether marking a tournament as 'verified' should remove these flags. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
See here: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Now that we're entering in tournament mappools (whenever they're publicly accessible), I'd appreciate a warning for "Tournament has a mappool entered, and a game that was NOT one of the first two games during a match is getting rejected because the map is not in the pool." This would make it easy for us to detect whenever we missed a round of a tournament, there's a missing beatconnect link that needs to be added in, etc. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
We need a way to flag games which use beatmaps that are only used once throughout the tournament. This is requested by @SourMongoose.
Edit:
This discussion will discuss the inclusion of warning flags that reviewers can look at during the review process. The idea is to get a brief glimpse into issues that do not necessarily warrant rejecting the item outright.
Proposed flags:
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions