YAMM

[Karsten75]

Yes, an acronym!  ;)

Yet Another Map Metric.

I think one of the hardest things is to gauge how hard a map really is. Perhaps a useful metric to calcualte might be the ratio of posted scores to downloads. That might give us an indication of how many players that attempt the map actually gets to finish it? So a 100% map is a map that can generally be completed, whereas a map that only the select few can complete is perhaps a 10% map? This might be an incentive for a map author to also play their map and upload a score, since then, after the first download, the author will have a 100% map rating as opposed to a 0% map rating. 

[bobandirus]

the question is how many people bother to post scores? I know I dont

[archn]

Sounds like a stupid idea.  :-X

[betadata]

the question is how many people bother to post scores? I know I dont

Yeah clicking that submit button is so hard  ;)

[Karsten75]

Sounds like a stupid idea.  :-X

Thank you for your valuable input. Nice tie.

[UpperKEES]

I often download a bunch of maps and play them later that week/month, which wouldn't give a good score for these maps during this period of time.

In general I think there are enough ways to filter and/or sort on characteristics of a map and these have not even been implemented yet. In my opinion it shouldn't be more complicated than necessary. We have a rating (by players), we have a difficulty (by author), we have the number of downloads and we have the fastest and average time to finish the map. Besides this you can filter on your favorite author. How much more do we need to make our decisions?  ::)

I've heard the argument before against using the rating (people might give their own maps 5 stars and those of others just 1), but this will even out when enough people are playing. On every download site applications are rated and probably the same will happen there, without any problems.