cwslyclgh Marathon Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8 |
R Pickard RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8 , Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8 aka DeathQuaker |
I wish it were 30 seconds instead of 60. I am glad there is a timer--and it has actually saved me from clicking on the wrong button in a knee jerk reaction. And I seem to recall last year the 60 second timeout felt about right. This year it does seem too slow, and I'm not sure what it is, except one thing is I have gotten a lot of repeat items--often in a row--so I have JUST read the entry and don't need a refresher course on what it does. And then that just makes me want to stop voting.
Which mind, might be the sane thing to do. But still.
Jester David Star Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9 |
I don't have many problems with it; it certainly stops people spamming votes.
Except the increasingly frequent times where I get a familiar item. Or worse, two familiar items.
I may be posting here to run down the clock.
Oh, look, two familiar items. Twice in a row.
Are we drawing from a pool of items?
Zi'on Darkbane Dedicated Voter Season 7 |
Treppa Dedicated Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7 |
Kenton Abel Marathon Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7 |
If I made the rules, I'd drop the timer to 30 seconds for Star Voter and then drop again to 15 at Dedicated Vote. I'm very rarely finding two new items, and when I do, I read them both regardless of time.
If you trust us to vote for the better item, why not trust us to take our time to vote correctly. We could all just start voting for the item we like less, but you trust us not to do so.
Sean K Reynolds Designer, RPG Superstar Judge |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe that each item in a pair is worth 30 seconds of your time to read it and compare it freshly in your mind to the other item, which likewise deserves 30 seconds of your time.
It's just 60 seconds, folks. Think about how many hours each of the judges have volunteered for RPG Superstar over the past several years. Think about how long it took a person—perhaps a new gamer, excited and enthusiastic about the chance at becoming a professional writer—to write each item.
If you're voting just to get a voter tag, you're doing it for the wrong reason. If you're voting to help rank the items after a fair consideration, you're doing it for the right reason.
cwslyclgh Marathon Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8 |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sean, there is a marked difference in the public voting for wondrous items than there was in previous years when it was not public... in that the judges, when they saw an item that they knew for one reason or another would not make it to the top 32, could dismiss it and never have to look at it again, let alone reread it carefully dozens of times as it is shoved onto their screen vs. other items that they have already read dozens of times (Dozens might be an exaggeration for some voters, but my list shows that there are 4 items that I have seen more than 12 times each and this is only day 3 of voting).
I know that you don't have the time, but I think if you were to spend a few hours down here with us rabble voting like we do, you too would come to resent the timer, at least when certain pairings popped up on your screen.
Tokoz Marathon Voter Season 7 |
It doesn't bother me much at all. The starting post came from getting two at once that I had read at least five minutes prior.
I ALWAYS either know one from having recently seen and read all of it OR I read one of them carefully through.
The second one I will usually read all the way through, unless like on that odd time above, I get two I read recently together.
I'll willingly admit that I start reading the second one but will stop if I see a show stopper in it that is not replicated by an equal type showstopper in the first.
One that is only partially read is never counted as read before.
It would be a kind of a nice nod to those of us that volunteer our time as well (not as much, but some), if it lowered the time required by 15 seconds if we'd already been presented with one or both.
When I do end up waiting, it's usually less than 30 seconds and often only about 15.
I don't think anyone here is really complaining about it. =P We're just constructively wishing or trying to be funny. =)
Sean K Reynolds Designer, RPG Superstar Judge |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm just saying: I've put in over 20 hours or work just on THIS year's RPG Superstar, between meetings, wrangling guest judges, and writing the rules documents and FAQs.
I don't doubt that seeing the same bad items pop up is frustrating. But... it's just 60 seconds. Even if you know both items are bleh, you could watch TV, or listen to a song, or fiddle with a mini, or anything, just to pass the time.
The timer is there to prevent people from just spamming the vote button, which isn't fair to the competitors. I sympathize with the voters, but my heart is with the competitors.
Tokoz Marathon Voter Season 7 |
cwslyclgh Marathon Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8 |
I guess I just wonder if people spamming the vote button would really be a problem... I know I am taking the time to vote to try to make this contest the best that it can be... not out of any agenda to see any particular item do well (even my own, which I haven't seen yet, and doubt I will any time soon). I would assume that others are voting for the same reasons as myself. Better safe than sorry though, I suppose.
frank gori RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32 , Marathon Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Champion Voter Season 8, Marathon Voter Season 9 aka GM_Solspiral |
I'm just saying: I've put in over 20 hours or work just on THIS year's RPG Superstar, between meetings, wrangling guest judges, and writing the rules documents and FAQs.
I put 20hrs into revisions on just the item I submitted. Add to that several submissions in the blazing 9 thread for practice, proofing for a couple friends, and prolly close to 20 hours of voting.
Last year I reviewed every item in the critique my item thread and I'll prolly do that again this year (unless I'm gagged via making the top 32.)
Still... I've got nothing on Anthony Adam, or Feros.
I can accurately describe most of the items from last year and definitely most of the items I've seen this year. The same items come up again and again when you vote in the numbers a dedicated or marathon voter puts in.
We're not doing it for the tags,though they are appreciated, but most of us diehards are doing this because we want to see all the items. It's the competitor in me I want to see the best items before they are top 32. I want to see all the items to see how I stack up.
You should want that from a designer. Your designers should read their reviews, and they should read their colleges reviews. They should appreciate one another's work but they should also want to be the best.
Cutting the timer by 15 seconds from dedicated on would help us sort the items for you. I assure you the voters want to see and vote up the best items. Anything less would be hollow.
Treppa Dedicated Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7 |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Shoot, I'll take five minutes to dissect two new items, and that's simply to choose between them. Serious contenders deserve serious consideration. But before the cull, there are some 'no way' items that won't ever get a vote. Unfortunately, there's no way for the system to tell if the items are good or bad or new or previously seen. I don't agree on decreasing time by voting tag.
It's not about the voter tags, Sean. Don't worry. We're not that shallow.
Thomas LeBlanc RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32 , Champion Voter Season 6, Champion Voter Season 7, Champion Voter Season 8, Champion Voter Season 9 |
Azouth Champion Voter Season 7, Champion Voter Season 8, Dedicated Voter Season 9 |
I believe that each item in a pair is worth 30 seconds of your time to read it and compare it freshly in your mind to the other item, which likewise deserves 30 seconds of your time.
It's just 60 seconds, folks. Think about how many hours each of the judges have volunteered for RPG Superstar over the past several years. Think about how long it took a person—perhaps a new gamer, excited and enthusiastic about the chance at becoming a professional writer—to write each item.
If you're voting just to get a voter tag, you're doing it for the wrong reason. If you're voting to help rank the items after a fair consideration, you're doing it for the right reason.
But many items don't take that long to read or know what item is better.
More so when you are just rereading an item you may just read less then 10 mins ago.So, people look, say item X is better, then go do something for the remainder of the time.
If you are voting to help rank the items after a fair consideration, you end up with read the names, saw them before, move to another web tab for 40 second, click your vote. repeat.
But if the timer were less I think I might be more inclined to do a more longer rereading, I know when I get a new item vs one I have read, I reread the old item more then when I have saw both before.
Jester David Star Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9 |
I don't doubt that seeing the same bad items pop up is frustrating. But... it's just 60 seconds. Even if you know both items are bleh, you could watch TV, or listen to a song, or fiddle with a mini, or anything, just to pass the time.
Or post on a forum. ;)
I do like to give each item some thought and think through the choice. And the time is nice for that somber second judgment to prevent a hasty click. I've changed my mind a couple times. I wouldn't suggest shortening the timer by a second.
But sometimes there's just a clear winner. Something with obviously bad design or a rules mistake. And that time is just 30 seconds too long. And those seconds are the longest.
Not often mind you. I've voted at least a hundred times and I've only really needed to kill time a dozen times. And most of those times were the result of repeat items. No single item more than five or six times thankfully.
Feros Champion Voter Season 6, Champion Voter Season 7, Champion Voter Season 8, Champion Voter Season 9 |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As someone who has suffered the one minute timer longer than most, let me put in my two cents on the subject.
I have a number of criteria that I use when voting, in the following order:
1. Does the item have a cool visual tied to it?
2. Is the item easy to understand?
3. Does it have internal consistency?
4. Is it properly formatted?
5. It is gross?
Sometimes, the gross question overwhelms me and I will initially down vote an item in disgust. Other times, the writing is badly edited or the format is so out of whack it is painful to look at. As a result items that have some merit in spite of their faults gets downvoted without much more than the initial perusal.
I have found that with the one minute delay with items that I have already seen—and at this point of the competition I have seen 642 individual items—I can review each and give a second or third going over. From this I have gone form having an item that I downvoted initially to my keep file. I have seen beyond the initial structure and seen a bit of the design process that went into it. From this, I have become a better designer and reviewer. My personal entry in 2014 is FAR better than my Hunter's Geas of last years competition.
So all in all, I think that those of us who vote so often that we see the same items again and again should use the one minute to reread and revaluate. Someone may have put a lot of work into that item. A few minutes of thought (even ten to twenty minutes of thought) is really not too much to ask, is it?
Kalervo Oikarinen RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16 , Marathon Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Marathon Voter Season 8 |
R Pickard RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8 , Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8 aka DeathQuaker |
I'm just saying: I've put in over 20 hours or work just on THIS year's RPG Superstar, between meetings, wrangling guest judges, and writing the rules documents and FAQs.
I don't doubt that seeing the same bad items pop up is frustrating. But... it's just 60 seconds. Even if you know both items are bleh, you could watch TV, or listen to a song, or fiddle with a mini, or anything, just to pass the time.
Or realizing our time could be better spent, we could stop voting entirely, and then the judges don't get the help they want from this process.
The timer is there to prevent people from just spamming the vote button, which isn't fair to the competitors. I sympathize with the voters, but my heart is with the competitors.
Most of what I see here is people asking for it to be shorter, not to do away with it entirely. I believe the timer serves a purpose and should remain, but it is too long, especially because of repeat items--and no, I do not need 30 seconds to re-read the misspelled, unformatted 90-word spell in a can one more time, and I daresay were you doing this process, given you tend to not be shy of sharing your frustrations (which is not a criticism or intended to be an insult, just an observation based on your posts), not only would you be feeling the same way, you'd be complaining even more bitterly about the process.
I can also see a longer timer being more valuable for later stages of the contest.
Sean K Reynolds Designer, RPG Superstar Judge |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or realizing our time could be better spent, we could stop voting entirely, and then the judges don't get the help they want from this process.
If the one-minute timer is such a burden to you, you are welcome to stop voting. I think the math will do its job if we only get 100,000 votes instead of 500,000 votes.
Most of what I see here is people asking for it to be shorter, not to do away with it entirely.
And all I'm saying, yet again, is it's 60 seconds. This is a first world problem, people.
Lightminder Dedicated Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8 |
Kenton Abel Marathon Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7 |
If the one-minute timer is such a burden to you, you are welcome to stop voting. I think the math will do its job if we only get 100,000 votes instead of 500,000 votes.
I am actually inclined to take you up on your offer. It has been an hour since I saw a new item, and my time is valuable.
If the system was set up to make sure I saw every item at least once before repeating items, I'd be happy with the one minute timer. This was discussed last year. I know a system could be designed to do with without too much difficulty, I wrote a similar algorithm in college in 1986. I appreciate that we need to give due consideration, but unfortunately I have many other things to do in my day than wait for the timer to finish just to see if I might get a new item.
One possible compromise would be to allow the "Pass" button to not have a timer (aka, the "Both items are equal" non-vote button). Thus, if I don't want to wait to vote between two SIAC/SAK items that don't have any chance, I can skip to the next pair.
cwslyclgh Marathon Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8 |
TimsterMon Marathon Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 9 |
R Pickard RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8 , Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8 aka DeathQuaker |
Sean K Reynolds wrote:I am actually inclined to take you up on your offer. It has been an hour since I saw a new item, and my time is valuable.
If the one-minute timer is such a burden to you, you are welcome to stop voting. I think the math will do its job if we only get 100,000 votes instead of 500,000 votes.
I think I'll join you. What happens is when I finish reading I click away from the page and read something else while the timer goes down, then it inevitably takes me actually more like 5-10 minutes per item as I get involved in other things, and then that's only a few items an hour--and I've got lots of other things--and indeed bigger problems, first world and otherwise--to do. I was joining in only to help the community, but I've got other communities like my religious one to volunteer my time for and I think ultimately that will be more worthwhile all around.
Tokoz Marathon Voter Season 7 |
TimsterMon Marathon Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 9 |
Jester David Star Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9 |
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
If the one-minute timer is such a burden to you, you are welcome to stop voting. I think the math will do its job if we only get 100,000 votes instead of 500,000 votes.I am actually inclined to take you up on your offer. It has been an hour since I saw a new item, and my time is valuable.
If the system was set up to make sure I saw every item at least once before repeating items, I'd be happy with the one minute timer. This was discussed last year. I know a system could be designed to do with without too much difficulty, I wrote a similar algorithm in college in 1986. I appreciate that we need to give due consideration, but unfortunately I have many other things to do in my day than wait for the timer to finish just to see if I might get a new item.
One possible compromise would be to allow the "Pass" button to not have a timer (aka, the "Both items are equal" non-vote button). Thus, if I don't want to wait to vote between two SIAC/SAK items that don't have any chance, I can skip to the next pair.
I can see the point of repeating.
If I see an good item paired with a great item then that good item loses votes. But if I see that same good item a couple more times with an okay and a terrible item it has a chance.
Or, conversely, an okay item getting upvoted by being paired with a terrible item.
It reduced the variability of a single pairing determining your view on an item.
But, yeah, it has been a while since I've seen something new...