Create a new badge and user group named “scripter”.
When a user posted 15 topics in Free Scripts they are awarded with the “Scripter” badge, which automatically adds them to the “scripter” user group.
This is useful as we can then control permissions individually for scripters. For example, allowing them to edit their own topic indefinitely without having to reach trust level 2.
I’m for this, though 15 topics can take some a long time to do while others can do it quickly via using something like FunScript Dancer or the new AI stuff to just make the scripts for them and they do very slight tweaks. So I think the requirements need something more like maybe a submission of an script or few they’ve done to make sure that they are actually scripting instead of doing what I said prior?
Additionally I think by the time someone’s done 15 topic posts they’ve probably already reached trust level 2 since the requirements for that are very easy with the hardest being maybe visiting 15 different days.
One way to maybe help with having the right requirements is via defining what a “scripter” is? Someone who posts scripts…often? Good quality? Of a certain length? Is liked enough? Is followed?
While discussing future potential rules, would this be acceptable?
To create topics under the Paid Scripts category, a user with the mentioned scripter group would need to post 10-15 (open to community discussion along with the like threshold) funscripts in the free category and receive 10+ likes per topic or 100 cumulative likes in order to add posts to the paid category. This would encourage funscript creation by the community and those who have proven their work would then have the ability to monetize it through various platforms. Unless it would be easier to just lock the paid scripts category to those who have earned the “scripter” group badge.
I’m with ya. Love the new tag but I focus on multi-axis scripting which takes like 10x as long as a single axis script. I have 40 hours each on just 4 multi-axis scripts, and while I’m trying to improve my workflow and develop some new techniques for realism, it’s going to take me forever to get to 15 scripts.
I agree with the others that 15 may be a lot, I would say someone with 10 really high quality scripts should have a scripter title while someone with 20 short low quality scripts may not deserve the title (these numbers are just an example not a suggestion, I’m also not saying that short scripts mean bad quality, again just an example).
Perhaps a manual process? Like someone has to “apply” for the scripter title and their portfolio would be manually reviewed. Not an in depth review like it’s a resume for a job interview, just a quick look through. Could prevent people from spamming shit quality scripts just to get the badge.
If an manual process is possible to do I feel that it must be only be possible to apply for once you’ve been on the website for like an month and 5 scripts (minimum) posted can only apply for it once in a while like more than an month or two. Otherwise Staff would be overwhelmed easily (more than they already are)…unless it’s made possible that others with the scripter tag can approve or reject applications. (can provide a rough guideline for what they should be looking at in an applicant’s portfolio)
I support a scripter tag for established scripters. Some mentioned that 15 scripts is high. I don’t think it’s high. It’s a badge for those that put serious effort into releasing scripts and shouldn’t be for everyone that release a couple of scripts and then quit.
You might consider different thresholds depending on what people script though. 15 3-minute scripts are basically one VR script. And multi-axis require much more effort than a single axis script. At the same time you need to keep it simple so this doesn’t become a burden for mods and site admins.
Regarding some of the comments about the paid section…
Personally I feel that more and more releases become paid content (at least in some script categories) and ES is becoming more of an advertising site for those. IMHO this site shall not be responsible for any wetting process for paid scripters and their work quality as some have suggested above. As a consumer it’s your responsibility to decide what your put money on. If a scripter release a paid script and hasn’t released any free scripts previously then you already know that you are buying “a pig in the bag”. Don’t spend money if you aren’t willing to take the risk.
Not really. Many use it as a thanks for providing a free script before even trying the script (based on that lots of scripts get a bunch of likes only minutes after the script is released).
Which is why I include polls usually so then those that do come back to like because they liked the script can express it. Does mean that those that want to hate can more easily do so though.
Yep and so it’s becomes a case of where that baseline threshold should be overall (before you can apply for the tag/badge) is the question in my mind since I don’t believe that it’s possible to do a system where it identifies how many of each type you’ve done…or at least not possible without some serious behind the scenes work.
It definitely requires some thought on how to hand out this badge if it becomes a reality. TBH, it might even be better if it’s up to mods/admins to decide based on a combination of factors:
how long has someone been an ES member
how long has the scripter been scripting
how many scripts and in what niches (to cover differences between scripting short clips, VR, multi-axis etc.)
feedback in the release threads (both good or bad)
I.e., no specific set of rules to avoid that mess, just a bunch of factors used to determine if someone has become a “serious” scripter.
I like this… a way to make sure they gave ppl the ability to test, give feedback etc to their scripts without paying. I purchased a patron sub due to the scripter having a lot of free content that I liked before going the paid route. Dislike when ppl with no history or recent posts go directly to paid. How do we know if it’s a good scripter or not
how about compilation topics ? would that also count ?
context : i made a dedicated topic with over 20 scripts, would that means i can’t get the scripter role cause i didn’t do 15 separate topics ?
This right here seems to be the real sticking point. Case in point, I have ~22 topics but that represents ~275 videos albeit most of those are 3 - 10 minute PMVs. It seems some combination of number of topics, number of videos, and total time scripted seems to be necessary to define the category and that doesn’t even account for the fact that someone could use automated tools to create scripts to pad these numbers.
At the end of the day, we’ll probably need to just use either an application to / review by to the admin/mods to grant such a user group. Based on how they’ve handled the forum, I have confidence that they would wield such authority properly and fairly. Have the admin/mods give general guidelines for what qualifies someone for the user group, have that user DM the designated admin/mod if they think they qualify, and have them adjudicate the application to avoid edge cases being included or disqualified because the set of conditions does not perfectly circumscribe the site’s intuition on what defines a scripter.
We just have to trust the admin/mods to administer such a system.
Problem is with having only admin/mods deal with this user group is that well…there’s too few and they are already overloaded with work to do I believe. Which is why I feel that it would be better to allow people inside the user group (or maybe a rotating council kinda thing of known scripters) to deal with such a system so the staff don’t gain too much extra load.
It just doesn’t seem possible to do if you want to allow everyone whom has made a script to have an equal chance unless you have it be an probably complicated system. Since just going off 15 topics made does seem unfair to those whom struggle to put out that many for their preference of doing length or multi-axis scripts OORR more recently said of those that do collection releases. Meanwhile it’s extremely easy for AI-bro’s to just spit out several horrible short scripts and get the badge/group.
Totally understandable, having the human bandwidth is always an if. I just see that if a set of rules can’t be agreed upon, then the only option would be to utilize someone with the requisite authority. Obviously I’d rather the admin and mod staff be maintaining the backbone of the site than stamping “approved” on applications, given the choice. I have some thoughts on an automated system as well.
Since there’s a lot of worry about gaming the system, maybe we can take ideas from academic publishing and adopt it here. One idea might be to use an h-index, where a poster has to have h posts with at least h likes. So instead of 15 posts, make it at least 15 posts with at least 15 likes per post. That should help weed out low-effort posts in order to pad the count, although it wouldn’t solve it definitively, it would at least prevent low-quality spam that is not received by the community. You could modify the index to an h*-index as well to account for average likes on posts because people like without actually reviewing the scripting quality by making the needed likes per post double or triple the h number (i.e. h2-index could be at h posts with at least 2h likes etc.) It would have to be up to someone’s discretion
To help with people who make high quality work but don’t have the output necessary for the h-index, you could add an OR condition with looking at the excess likes they have on their posts. For example, let’s say someone has an h-index of 5, so 5 posts with at least 5 likes, but they have a ton of likes on those 5 posts in excess of the 5 required for the index, then you could make a condition where if they have enough of a surplus, then they could still qualify. My suggestion would be to take the difference in required h-index from actual h-index and require surplus likes to be greater than the square of the difference. So for example, if someone has 5 posts with at least 5 likes, then they would need to have at least 125 total likes on those 5 posts to qualify. (Total post likes > (target h-index - actual h-index)^2 + (actual h-index^2)).
This way the fewer posts you have, the more likes you need per post to demonstrate sufficient quality, but that requirement decreases as you release more content to the site while maintaining a consistent level of required quality as you reach the 15 post goal. I know this is a lot of math and rambling for a group on a forum about sex toys, but I’m a scientist by career so I can’t help myself when I see a classification problem to be solved.
