Upvote/Downvote system on the Feedback site.

Bad feedbacks are parts of the process, period, and I think that reiceving bad feedbacks is also an important point because it gives you another point of view that you might not have think about, which is maybe not well formulated, but is still a real thing.

Sometimes people don't have the time to make great feedback, or sometime they are just not experienced enough to make them, or the map is so terrible that it doesn't need more explanation, it's just terrible that's it. But the issue they reveal might be an important point that everyone missed, especially about these great feedbacks, which most of the time are only a continuation of the mapper's own perspective, "put a path there", "move this here", "bla bla bla", but they rarely bring another dimension to the mapper's perspective.

Who are you to judge if the feedback is good or not, you can't only judge a feedback by it's presentation, someone could make a huge feedback with a lot of pictures, explanations and stuff, while not pointing out any important issues in the map, while someone could say, "The map sucks it's fucking overscaled in the mid" that it could nail the main problem of the map in one sentence.

The point is, even if the complains are too vague/rude/salty, you need these bad feedbacks, and it's usefull for the mapper to question himself about his work and if he is doing it the way it should be.

There are moderators here, and imo it's enough to get rid of the insults, even though I never seen one in a map topic tbh.

I don't see what's so difficult about just ignoring feedback you generally don't agree with. (Though that said, if you receive the same comments from multiple people then that's something worth considering.)

If someone gives you bad and useless feedback, you should, instead of ignoring it, try to think why he wrote it.

Don't take any of the feedback as a personal attack. Investigate each one, while looking at the vmf at the coordinates they gave it, and then decide if you should heed it or delete it.

The feedback system is a tool to improve your map. Use it and watch the demo over and over again. Think about what changes they're asking for; think about what's best for the map.

Sometimes it's a no brainer. "Clip this." Yeah, that's perfect -- fix it, mark it complete, move on.

Sometimes you're perplexed. "This part sucks." What? Vague. Put yourself in their position. Watch what happens in the demo when they left that feedback. Think about it. Figure out what change, if any is required.

Sometimes you just can't figure out what they meant no matter how many times you try. Delete it or mark it complete and move on.

But never take it personal.

I had someone who in one demo very clearly did not want to play on anyone else's maps, only his own. Other people told him to stop going AFK, stop whining, so he started leaving random feedback comments to show he was "being useful." But guess what? Even this person who didn't want to be there, who didn't want to help, and was being very random in feedback, actually offered some very valid feedback that nobody else did.

I'm not sure I agree with hiding feedback but I do think it's necessary to reprimand people who abuse the feedback system.

I think rating good feedback could tie in with a reputation system on the new forum. Though recently I have moved to providing voice feedback during tests, for the demos, rather than use text (excluding location=specific stuff), so I would be concerned that I was missing out. But it's only a score on a page on the internet anyway, so it doesn't really matter.

Highlighting some folks feedback over others sounds dangerous because it could give extra weight to comments from high ranking feedbackers and make some feedback look more important than the rest, when in fact as we know, feedback is something that needs to be interpreted, so one promoted comment doesn't mean it should be treated with most urgency.

Would a personal system be possible, ie if someone routinely gives you worthless/incomprehensible feedback, you can mark it as less valuable, which potentially greys it out or whatever, but only for you?

I think that if you're just personally trusting/distrusting people's feedback, there's no real reason to formally put that into the system. If someone has left that much of an impression on you, you'll just remember their name.

I think it would be important at least for new mappers just starting out. They don't know who these people are leaving feedback, and they don't know how to weigh everyone's comments.

I don't think an upvote/downvote system would really work in this situation. I feel it is more important to at least reward good feedback and make sure people aren't leaving "aui was being a butt" type of comments that are completely irrelevant.

I feel this is entirely unnecessary.

Sounds like a massive waste of time voting, waste of time building the actual system just for a largely useless "this person is sometimes a dick" filter

I kind of agree with YM, though I think Ibex raises a good point that this is useful for people who arent familiar with who is generally helpful and who isnt? Maybe just a way of giving a +1 to feedback could help, so people can see when people agree?

I think something similar to thanks would be fine; a mere "that was helpful". Something to distinguish it.

I don't think Lain meant bad feedback as in negative feedback, but instead poor quality feedback or even just rude comments. There's a difference between "I feel like your stage 2 is lacking" and "fuck this map honestly".