I like it. Seconded.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or even better... A counter on your profile that shows your total votes so far.
+1 to Keolin's. I know I've got to be getting near Dedicated, but...
What are the voting milestones?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
100 = Star Voter
500 = Dedicated Voter
1,000 = Marathon Voter
5,000 = Champion Voter
Vote through all entries before repeats.
Being able to send friends to your entry to vote for, get them hooked into broader participation.
Workshop chat to improve fails with constructive feedback, although that is proactively offered.
Would it be fair game to theorize and talk about the different ways the voting algorithm could work? I was thinking about how item pairs might be chosen last night while voting and I jotted down a few notes, but I was hesitant to post them. I was mostly hesitant as it's possible that information on the way the system works behind the scenes could lead to people attempting to "game" the system to manipulate votes. I'd love to talk about and poke at the puzzle of the algorithm, but not at the cost of the integrity of the voting system.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Vote through all entries before repeats.
Being able to send friends to your entry to vote for, get them hooked into broader participation.
Workshop chat to improve fails with constructive feedback, although that is proactively offered.
I like the idea of voting through all entries before repeats.
Not sure about sending friends to your entry. That'll make it a popularity contest. I doubt it would help broader participation much. Most people will just pop in, vote for their buddies item, and then leave.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
,
Marathon Voter Season 6, Marathon Voter Season 7, Marathon Voter Season 8, Dedicated Voter Season 9
aka Arkos
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
IIRC, each of the champion voters from last year contributed about 1% of the total votes each, so someone at the star/dedicated level who wanted to "game" things would have a pretty trivial effect. A highly publicized focus could change things, but the anonymity rules help against that.
For more on the voting system itself: http://www.cohp.org/records/difficulty/schulze.html
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I understand it, the randomness is necessary for the algorithms to work their magic. If you start using a no-repeats function, probability gets skewed. So I wouldn't count on that.
Also, by not focussing on individual things and specific items it becomes impossible to game the system. Very important for a blind entry system.
The problem with voting "on all entries" before repeats, a lot of voters might only vote until they get to see their item and stop, anything in their queue after that doesn't get a vote.
By pouring all items into a bucket and distributing them out randomly, every voter ensures that all items get voted on and when the voter stops, it doesn't matter or skew the voting results... the other voters take up the slack and carry on emptying that bucket - which is then refilled with all items, rinse and repeat.
Good point. How about the patent office does this same process and the top 32 get government grants!
It would be cool to see your vote count at the point a comment was made on these chat things, this is an idle wish. This process is pretty great already.
It's always easy to dream Utopias, but when someone hands you a shovel and says "show me" then it gets a little more grounded.
I had just voted on my 300th pair and was catching up with forum posts when I posted that :)
I think the timer needs work.
I'm glad it has the 60 seconds on there to force me to read both entries. There's been a few times where I would have voted on another item without reading it because the first item was so bad. I would have just shut it down reflexively.
But, I feel like the vote buttons unlock a bit early for paired 250+ word entries, and holds way too long for paired 150- word entries.
And, I feel like the vote buttons should know if you've already seen both items and deduct a bit of time under the assumption you can vaguely recall them.
If the timer were to change, I'd argue it shortens only for the marathon voters. Maybe shortens again for champion.
EDIT: oooh! I reached Star my counting is off by a huge percentage :)
Any net reduction, such as from 'items already seen' will be disproportionately beneficial for Marathon and Champion.
It could be just a simple forumlae - Take word count of first item, add it to word count of second item, and 10 seconds "thinking" time.
Divide that total by some "average words read per second".
Then the time should "on average" be about the right time to read both entries and have a little think about them.