Right, so some of you might remember me rambling in that dramatic thread. But I was actually quite serious and have talked to Frank about it since then. I mean no offense to anyone.

1. The site has become a file dump

When a poorly done file is uploaded, it gets one or two negative reviews warning others not to download it and then that download is dust. It just remains in the file section for centuries without ever being downloaded. How many percentage of Jazz2Online's downloads do you honestly think are being downloaded? I'm shooting at 10-25%, the rest are just junk nobody cares about.

2. The review system is more focused on quantity than quality reviews - Scratch this, check Flash's post.

To promote reviewers to be active on the site they are rewarded by a rank system. This system however only counts your number of reviews; there are no reward in making a well thought, posetive, and helpful review.

3. The reviews are only useful to the downloader and not the uploader

Reviews often don't suggest at all how the creator could have done a better job. It is a solo task to learn everything about creating levels and tilesets and while there are sites that suggest the technical parts the kind of advice that helps you to understand how to make a better game play are not there.

4. The uploader gets nothing in return

Perhaps except for the happy feel if your download actually gets some attention, but otherwise the site is extremely focused on labeling downloads than actually promote more uploads. I don't get a reward from the site for contributing with good downloads.

---

These are the problems that I see with the site. I have suggestions as well:

1. If a low rated file (not counting N/A) is on the site long enough, archive it. It should not be amongst the download section but the author can have it reappear by re-uploading with a better version or request an administrator to enable it for another period of time.

2. Change the values of the review system to be more motivate for helpful reviews. For example, posting a review could give one point. Getting an upvote could get you three. Also make ranks more visible, perhaps by tiny icons to make it easier to recognize good reviewers.

3. This is an extremely big problem because a lot of people lose the motivation to create more and improved files for J2O and a lot of "noobs" will never go through a learning curve simply because they don't see more than that 1.00-3.00 rating with a few negative words and then that's the end of their JCS career.

Some things that need to be considered are:

- Helpful criticism. It's not enough saying "There wasn't enough slopes.", telling where more slopes could have been placed will greatly help the understanding of how to do better next time.

- Lose the attitude. If there's one experience I have from J2O, it's that often I get the feel that from many "professional" reviewers it's whenever my download was worth their time or not. "FINE! If you don't like my download then I'll just spend my time doing something else, something that is more rewarding." That sums up my feelings on how careless some people put their reviews, and this attitude needs to go before more people get scared away. You want to tell whenever a download is good or not but you also want to keep it on a personal level because it's not some newspaper review - it's personal.

- Possibly allow responses to replies. Not re-reviews but so that the author can evaluate a review with the reviewer. Sort of like how I explained how to use a tileset in a thread on the JCS forum except for it would actually be on the spot.

4. These are just random ideas (didn't think it too much through).

- A rank system for quality downloads would be really awesome.

- Receiving optional automatic messages when your download gets a review would be dandy.

"k"

I've said what I've been meaning to say. It's not because I'm angry with the site. (I stopped playing the game a long time ago, but because of the friends I have here I felt like sharing my thoughts in an attempt to help). I would prefer not start to aggresively "argue" my feedback, rather discuss in a constructive manner.

Good ideas.

I do not think 1 is much of a problem as long as there is sufficient disk space and bandwith available. When searching for a specific upload the files you are talking about are mostly filtered out anyway.

Point 2 is already covered by the Helpful Index system I think, which influences the points a reviewer gets (the formula and an explanation is available at J2O in case you did not read about it yet). I do agree that the HI could perhaps have a little more weight in the formula, but that would be unfair towards people who have written a lot of quality reviews in the past, before HI was implemented.

Point 3 is not really something J2O can do much about apart from kindly asking review authors to provide constructive criticism, which it already does (it's guideline numero uno at the Reviewing Rules page). Personally I always try to point out how the author can improve his level, and I can only hope that any reviewer with common sense does this too.

I do agree wholeheartedly with your last point though. It would be nice if there was a "Top 40 uploaders" or something similar too. You could argue that most of those with a lot of quality uploads have made quite a name for themselves in the community already, but this only holds true for some, and especially when you look at the list of best rated Single Player uploads there are quite a few names in there which will probably not ring a bell for a lot of people.

As a last remark - even if you really do not care about the site at all, it would probably have been a good idea to look around a bit before writing this thread, as point 1 to 3 are not really much of a problem (anymore) or already "fixed" like you suggested (for example with the HI of reviews influencing the reviewer rank).

And I cannot help it but I find it quite lame to start a thread with a lengthy list of discussion point only to announce at the end that you yourself will not join in the discussion :P

Originally Posted by STIJN

And I cannot help it but I find it quite lame to start a thread with a lengthy list of discussion point only to announce at the end that you yourself will not join in the discussion :P

Sorry for not being clear, and for not checking what's already been done. I will gladly discuss. I just don't want to argue like in the past thread with certain people. You should know who I'm referring to and why.

Originally Posted by STIJN

I do not think 1 is much of a problem as long as there is sufficient disk space and bandwith available. When searching for a specific upload the files you are talking about are mostly filtered out anyway.

While it's not a problem in terms of storage, it however means that filters must be applied simply because you want to avoid all the low rated downloads. Come now, when is the last time you actually looked past the recent downloads page? I mean for heaven’s sake my first tileset is still there.

Originally Posted by MoonBlazE

While it's not a problem in terms of storage, it however means that filters must be applied simply because you want to avoid all the low rated downloads. Come now, when is the last time you actually looked past the recent downloads page? I mean for heaven’s sake my first tileset is still there.

Yesterday, actually. Anyway, if you are going past the recent downloads page, you will most likely do so by either searching for a specific upload, which means you know what you are looking for and that you will most likely not see the "bad" uploads as they will not meet your search query. Or you are simply browsing downloads, in which case people usually sort by rating which automatically moves bad uploads to the very bottom of the list. The filters are not used because you want to avoid low rated downloads, but because you are searching for something specific; and this what you are searching for does not include those downloads. I do not see the problem actually.

Of course, a more advanced search function would never hurt. Having a search function that would allow you to filter for any variable also listed in the "sort by" selectbox at the downloads page would be quite convenient.