Language…
17 users online: Batata Douce, Blizzard Buffalo, codfish1002, cozyduck, Foxy_9000_, Fozymandias, Housemeister, japexican007, Mario's GameBase, Maw, MorrieTheMagpie, playagmes169, ppp9q,  shovda, sinseiga, temsuper1,  YouFailMe - Guests: 244 - Bots: 350
Users: 64,795 (2,376 active)
Latest user: mathew

Adding an "Extra Resources Needed" section in Graphics Submissions

Just what the title says.
Usually, certain types of graphics submissions requires the usage of: Patches, or Blocks, or UberASM. And when this occurs, people needs to write them in the desription of the resource, which is inconsistent for most of them (some have links, some not, etc...). So I was thinking in merging that directly into the submission form, not only for having more consistency across all submissions, but also to be more friendly for both moderators and users.

Of course, this would apply only and ONLY to submissions that actually requires external resources (so for normal resources that doesn't need anything extra, this additional row won't appear), so I was thinking in a sort of markable option to enable the form section. And for the display I was thinking in something similar to the collapse tag:



However, I know this may be a big change (especially to already aproved submission, which will need to be edited) but I feel this could be a good addition. I'd like to see what Graphics mods think about this, too.
This isn't directly related to coding. I'll forward it to the graphics team so they can decide whether they want me to add it.
I don't see much usefulness in this. The only issue pointed out so far is inconsistency with some resources being linked but others not, which is easily resolved through proper moderation and reporting. Also, some of these extra resources aren't hosted in the site and will inevitably not be linked anyway.

Originally posted by Shiny Ninetales
but also to be more friendly for both moderators and users.

I slightly disagree for both sides: submitters will have one more field to fill, users will have one more to check and mods will have one more to moderate, with the added possibility of a submitter reporting what extra resources are needed but not why they're needed in the first place, which would be sort of encouraged with such a system.

I can see some organizational value in it, however. What I suggest is, instead of putting links in Extra Resources Needed, we could use checkboxes or multi-selection so submitters can mark what kinds of extra resources are needed, which would force the Description field to be used for details on which specific resource is needed and why. The more information on what the user will be inserting in their hack, the better. The addition of such a field would also obsolete the patch needed tag, plus the block needed tag we were going to add later on. For the checkboxes/multi-selection we could use:
  • None (marking this would disable selection for the other options);
  • Custom Block(s);
  • Custom Patch(es);
  • UberASM;
  • and maybe Other, although I think the previous ones already cover every possibility.
Thanks for the reply.

Indeed, what I proposed had some flaws and I knew it, and I agree with you, thinking it twice. What you proposed seems better I guess, at least for the organization part and the resource clarity (after all, as you said, that was more the point), but I think it's good enough to start with. I actually wasn't thinking about removing those kind of tags though, but can be considered if this become a thing, I guess.
Layout made by MaxodeX
2021 TRENO vibe check thread