Hello, NSM. Over the few years that I have been on this site, I have developed an appreciation for the relatively new submission system, and I am still grateful for it, as well as the fact that I joined
after it was put into effect. However, with the recent change in staff over the past year, I have become concerned for the cycle, and would like to propose a couple of changes/additions to the system, in order to possibly improve the overall cycle of sheet-accepting, for both new and veteran arrangers:
YouTube Link EmbeddingIt's a common problem that needs to be addressed with newcomers: YouTube links need to be pasted into a submission topic, so that the updaters don't need to go looking for the songs themselves. But even for some that come to the site and read the rules before doing anything, they fail to paste the link; when an updater kindly reminds them, some take it the wrong way and are put off by the request. When the YouTube link isn't present for the updaters, they can't check it when they want to, and this slow the process down.
But I think this can be easily remedied. If a new feature when submitting was added so that a sheet cannot be finalized without pasting in a link, this would never be a problem again. An embedded link would replace the usual first reply in the topic, but would still be able to be opened by anyone. A two-step process of submitting work would be reduced to one, just like that, benefiting both the arrangers
and the updaters.
Credit Information RequirementI believe that crediting the right people should be a higher priority than we put it at. Right now, it's as if the only people that point out errors like these are just fans of the games involved, and notice the small mistakes easier than others. Yes, some games have better resources for credit information than others, but this shouldn't be an excuse to correct inaccuracies only when prompted by prior knowledge. We need a better system for making sure this information can easily be checked.
I propose that before submitting a sheet, the
Composers,
Additional Arrangers,
Developers,
Publishers, and
Initial Release Date should all be researched and listed to insure these bloopers don't go unnoticed. This way, the sheet cannot be submitted incomplete, and with everything displayed in one place in the topic, the updaters can verify the credits in an easier, quicker way. Lastly, the release date requirement will save updaters the trouble of entering it in themselves later.
Email-BumpingWe all know what an updater bumping a submission means: one of them or a fellow arranger decided to give you some feedback to push your submission closer to acceptance, and you haven't responded to it yet (for a long time, likely,) so you're getting a nice little nudge. This either means that A.) You read the feedback but told yourself "I'll address it later" (and never did), B.) You hit the "MARK ALL MESSAGES AS READ" button and never noticed you had any feedback,
or C.) You're not as active in the NSM community as some others, and you unintentionally drifted away from the site while someone took the time to help you. Some newcomers don't understand how this forum works, and don't find out when someone replies in their topic. And some truly wonderful sheets over the years have been archived because the arrangers forgot to take care of what they started. While this doesn't prevent them from submitting the same sheet again, it's a issue that doesn't have to exist. There's a better way to remind arrangers to fix their sheets.
Bumping would be a lot more universal if the updaters' system was to incorporate an automatic email reminder to send out, instead of bumping in the topic, where they're less likely to see it. This shouldn't be too hard to implement, given that we already have personal messages that automatically send a copy to the user's email. This is what I'm picturing:
It's not intimidating, and it can reach out to an arranger better than a post in a topic, even if they momentarily forgot about their involvement on the site. Simple as that!
If my above suggestions are added to the Submission system, the process will:
- move more efficiently
- insure accuracy
- make sheet assessment noticeable
These plans may not make updates occur more often, but I at least wish for everyone to have an easier time being involved in the sheet acceptance process, newcomers and old-timers alike; we can have more than just the regular arrangers involved in updates! Please understand that this isn't a list of demands, so please, staff, give me your thoughts on how well these concepts and ideas might work, or how they might be fleshed out/revised.
