I'd like to make a few points here (please note I'm a little salty my track didn't get featured but I'd like to address this current system and the flaws as I'm annoyed about other things)
Who gets to vote:
Currently, admins like Eryp and all VIP trackmakers get to have a say in what tracks get featured based on their feedback. I have no problem with this, but I find it annoying when the votes for a track are inconsistent, one track may have 4 people vote (like mine), and then another gets 6. Why not keep the sample size for judges consistent (I think 5-6 is a good number) it ensures more feedback for the trackmaker and more viewpoints on whether the track should get featured. Plus consistency doesn't make others less likely to get a feature.
Consistency
The VIP team aim to get feedback out within a week of a track being published if they think it's good enough for feedback or was suggested by someone. When my track was getting feedback, it took 9 days for a verdict (1-3 nay) and I'm yet to see the feedback. Like I know some people aren't available during that week but why not just extend the time for feedback to 2 weeks, it helps everyone.
Communication
The only communication the rest of the community gets when a track is getting feedback is if it's getting feedback, not who's voted or when feedback will be released. It's almost like you're just impatiently waiting (in my case I waited 9 days before getting a nay once I asked). This seems a little slack.
Judging rides
I've had a look at other feedback for tracks and sometimes the ride gets little feedback on it if the detail is so much better than the ride. But at least one person comments on improvements to the ride for all feedback which is nice. But a big problem I have is how those who gave feedback for a certain track don't even ghost it. From my knowledge and research, Eli was the only one who ghosted my track, ELI, ONE (we all know how bad Eli is at ghosting, probably the worst from the whole team, he knows it). So are you guys playing one part of the track and then that's it? Similar to my other point WHERE IS MY FEEDBACK! Who ghosted the track, who looked at the ride properly, whatever. It seems detail is the main factor for whether a track is feat worthy or not (in most cases it is) but because the detail in my track is slightly copy-paste, use of grid and cartoony, at least pay more attention to the ride. Oh, have I not mentioned for the 3rd time that I still don't have my feedback, so how tf am I meant to know what was said? (those past points are assumptions)
Feedback
This is pretty straightforward, sometimes not everyone's feedback was posted for a verdict on a track. It's either yay or nay with the vote count and one or two feedback messages from the team. COME ON, I want to know who said yay or nay and what I can improve on for future projects. It aint hard, it's almost like they only have a glance at the track and say yay or nay.
Comparisons and standard
I know I'm not a VIP or person giving feedback, but sometimes you have to question what the VIPs are thinking when they give feedback. Take
Bark by Wellebelly for example, even tho it got 3-3, how in the actual f did it get featured? (now I'm really salty). The detail is clean and the ride is really neat but there isn't enough detail in the track. The track canvas is hardly filled. The elements in the track are drawn well BUT THERE IS HARDLY ANY ELEMENTS. I was always not a big fan of
Well by Loge for getting featured, but I think that track shines over Bark (no hate Wellebelly). There is way more going on and I think that ride outshines the small but very clean detail of Bark. Do we need to update the guidelines for what makes a track feature worthy again? I agree with the quality over the quantity standard, but Bark doesn't have much going for it, the recycling (although effective which makes for a nice ride), makes the track too compact. Why did we reward Wellebelly for a track that has an unfinished feel to it? (like what Maple said) If they featured Bark, damn, I'd feature all the other good Wellebelly tracks like
Cent and
Blossom which I think are better than Bark as they are much bigger with overall clean detail as well. But ofc we can't do that, we can't give this man who hardly puts any effort into a track EA (this sounds rude btw I apologise). But to sum up, although an overall great track, the detail given isn't spectacular nor is the track canvas big enough to warrant a feature in my eyes. A track much smaller like
Temple run by Ishu did it way better for the scale, it's insane the detail for such a small track.
Featuring older tracks and just plain reading suggestions
I love the idea of featuring older tracks if they get suggested (like
SLD Dirt Factory 2020 by goofyinc), but I can count too many times when old tracks were suggested for feedback and no feedback has come. Like I know you guys have a life and I appreciate all you do for the trackmaking scene, but it is almost like you're ignoring people. Like, what about your initiative? I could count on my hand the number of people who should have their tracks looked at to be featured. TEAM PHANTOM TEAM PHANTOM TEAM PHANTOM. Hello?!? His detail is very appealing to the eye and the scale of his tracks is crazy at times (rides are hit or miss and lines are too constant or repetivitve but he should be rewarded for a couple more tracks).
General questioning
How did
deferred get 1 nay, heaps of positives are going for it, considering all things the track is extremely dope.
Updraft by Loge. It got one yay, how did a track like that get any yay?!?!?! My track got 1 yay as well, compare both tracks please, who do you think deserves more yays? I know this is coming from the maker of the track itself and with no feedback to refer to, but how is Updraft on the same plane as
ss5?!?!? I almost feel the VIPs have favourites as I would not feature
Wahoo or
Well by loge either (sorry buddy).
Conclusion
After finishing this rant, I am very salty, very angry and questioning everything the VIPs do. Although part of this has sprouted from my track getting a nay, I think I make some valid points here, and I'm not lying or exaggerating some of them, they are damn true. Please note I don't want tracks being stripped of feats (unless they were traced or something) nor do I want to be like pssst and feature the most basic jumps track ever. But I feel no one has seen the laziness or flaws of this new system. The basic idea behind it is much better than the last system but atm, it isn't being pulled off in the best way possible. Once my feedback for my track FINALLY gets released,
I kindly ask for the feedback and voting to be redone with more people and in a thorough way (I don't care if the track gets featured or not, the track isn't anything inspiring) but the whole point of this new system is get highly regarded trackmakers who know what they're talking about to feature tracks whilst also giving feedback to up and coming trackmakers (that is the most important part).
Please, PLEASE read all of this, I think everyone can benefit from it. (Once again, I'm a little salty about my track considering how long ago I started it and the effort put in, but please consider all the points I made, it would mean a lot, I ain't no average FRHD player, I see things, I know what happens, I'm here to help, serve and spread my honest opinions of the game).
Thank you 
Click to expand...
