| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo staff:
Are you able to look back at previous day(s) and compare the data from the voting process to the current day's ranking data? I would be interested to know if the top 25% or so are still seeing any fluctuation in ranking. If it is, are these changes relevant mathematically?
Perhaps this isn't something that can be shared pre-results, but, as an observer, it would be interesting to know how this experiment is revealing itself over time rather than a static end result. It might be that the time frame could be shortened in future years.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is probably statistically similar to throwing a weeks worth of garbage into a swimming pool and watching the results.
Let us say the pool drain is the coveted top 32 positions. The discarded cabbage, rotten potatoes, and a Twix that you found out that is not a Twix is all floating at the top to be picked off mercilessly by crows. Some of it fell out on the pool deck even. The congealed applesauce and unidentifiable thing on a paper towel is floating up and down with the currents, usually somewhere in the middle. Just below that is the strangely curious diaper filled with the full pallet of colors - interesting but not a keeper. To the far left is the 4th edition PHB, which is caught in the pool filter, being slowly torn to bits. Cans, jars and other things which have a recycle value between 5 and 0.1 cents is near the bottom. Perhaps a pool cleaner will separate those and redeem their value later. At the very bottom at the pool drain is your wife's wedding ring and your iphone which you accidentally tossed when 'helping' to the clean the kitchen. Quite valuable and unwise to loose. All-in-all, some of the items in the current bobbed up and down but not much else changed as time passed.
I jest of course. I'm sure Greg, Vic, Ross etc could write the query to do as you ask, but I'm not sure why they would want that public.
That description is so good, I find myself wondering if you play tested it :P
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
We're not obsessively, repeatedly, and for no good reason running processing-intensive algorithms on a daily basis. We've done some spot-checking using simplified methods, and ensured that things are behaving consistent with expectations, though.
I strongly suspect next year's voting period will be *much* shorter.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
We're not obsessively, repeatedly, and for no good reason running processing-intensive algorithms on a daily basis. We've done some spot-checking using simplified methods, and ensured that things are behaving consistent with expectations, though.
I strongly suspect next year's voting period will be *much* shorter.
Just like we're not obsessively, repeatedly, and for no good reason voting over and over, keeping detailed logs, creating vast Excel spreadsheets with graphs, and deriving sum of geometric series equations approximating sums of sequences in order to estimate values.
I strongly suspect that if next year's voting period is *much* shorter, many people who are obsessively voting (but certainly not me, of course) will appreciate the hours and hours of time freed up.
We're not obsessively, repeatedly, and for no good reason running processing-intensive algorithms on a daily basis. We've done some spot-checking using simplified methods, and ensured that things are behaving consistent with expectations, though.
I strongly suspect next year's voting period will be *much* shorter.
First, thank you Samuel Kisko for illuminating the process.
And thanks, Vic Wertz, for confirming my suspicion.
Shorter would be very nice! Maybe let us just rank our top 32 after giving items a 1-100 score and a chance to adjust the scores after we give every item a score?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My guess for next year: Eleven days. Voting begins on a friday and ends the next monday. This would give two weekends for voting and keep things short. There will likely be a bottom 25% cut on the tuesday or wednesday in between to spur voting again. Though I can't see this year's results, I'm guessing this would be plenty long and will have a very similar outcome to what they will get in this years prolonged voting time.
Paizo staff:
Are you able to look back at previous day(s) and compare the data from the voting process to the current day's ranking data? I would be interested to know if the top 25% or so are still seeing any fluctuation in ranking. If it is, are these changes relevant mathematically?
Perhaps this isn't something that can be shared pre-results, but, as an observer, it would be interesting to know how this experiment is revealing itself over time rather than a static end result. It might be that the time frame could be shortened in future years.
I still think the data/trends/math will make an excellant seminar at PaizoCon :)