Sprite Theme Contest v.3

[Apocalipsis]

I wouldn't mind being judge and don't take part on some contests, if I can post an entry just for fun.

[snorsorbet]

if I can post an entry just for fun.

lol I can't see how this would be a problem

[Alectric]

I wouldn't mind being judge and don't take part on some contests, if I can post an entry just for fun.

That sounds good! you chose the theme, i dont see why you cant judge ;D
Maybe we can have a poll as well to have a 'peoples choice' award (which is as good as second place) (unless you'd rather just stick with the judge option?)

[Apocalipsis]

Maybe we can have a poll as well to have a 'peoples choice' award (which is as good as second place) (unless you'd rather just stick with the judge option?)

Yeah, let's have that too. Whole thing sounds kinda elitist otherwise.

[klodasmone]

Here are the new voting system rules:

There should be 4 judges. One already awarded spriter (Apoc confirmed for one in this round). Then one of the admins – BP or MH. One of the mods - green, yellow or blue colored – in this case, as a founder of the contest, first one is Alectric. And one regular user. I suggest myself, if no one disagrees, just because I can. All of the judges can submit a sprite, if they want, but their sprites are not participating in the voting game. Now let me clear one thing – everybody votes. The judges have the biggest impact on votes. But every other user also votes; only their votes are equal to 1. Judges decide places for contestants and their vote value is as follows:

1st place: 25 votes
2nd place: 18 votes
3rd place: 15 votes
4th place: 12 votes
5th place: 10 votes
6th place: 8 votes
7th place: 6 votes
8th place: 4 votes
9th place: 2 votes
10th place: 1 votes

Questions, brethren?

[Simoneon]

Here are the new voting system rules:

I don't like your idea. Why? Mainly because it'd increase the level of elitism on here (which is already pretty high). All in all, having judges will end up in a dumb-biased way in my opinion, except if you can keep the good people in it (and preferably the ones who can sprite well).

meh.


@below: if it was in Lithuanian, then I think I'd understand. For somewhat reason you disabled PMing.

[klodasmone]

(Click to View)

Here are the new voting system rules:

I don't like your idea. Why? Mainly because it'd increase the level of elitism on here (which is already pretty high). All in all, having judges will end up in a dumb-biased way in my opinion, except if you can keep the good people in it (and preferably the ones who can sprite well).

meh.

A month or so back I had entered a poetry competition with similar rules: 4 judges, rating system – any number up to five (so maybe each judge can distribute up to five votes - 1 vote as in bad... 5 votes as in excellent, and you can fill the middle). Because of one low vote I fell out of the top three. It’s a shame that the site is in a foreign language you wouldn’t understand, because you could see how really effective it is. Experienced users can vote (that’s the difference, you have to have pretty high-ratings on your publications, only then you can vote), but the critics primaly decide everything. Meh? Well, it’s different and I’m kind of fresh blood with only good revolutionary intentions, so I don’t mind, if it won’t be used, but a few more opinions would be nice.

@Divisor

The idea of voting for judges is okay, while the selection should be narrowed down to three, I think.

[Divisor]

Why not combine democracy and judges?

Example 1: People vote judges, and judges decide on the winner and other things.
Example 2: Judges pick out 4-5 sprites for the final round, and then people choose between them by voting.



Or something like that.

[Siegvar]

@Klod:
I'm just assuming here... but that system looks like it'd still only aggravate the situation.
The whole problem lies in people only voting for the "best" few sprites, thus causing "Good" sprites that are relatively less impressive than the "Great" sprites to NOT GET VOTES... and is a lousy indicator of how well those sprites have done, and a terrible hit to the participants' morale.
Your system just gave even more weight to different voters, but does not address the misleading chasm between the "good" and "great" sprites' votes received, and in fact feeds it.

Anyway I thought I'd like to furthur explain my idea of how a Judge system or a Rating system could work.
The rationale of a Judge Panel, is essentially to act as a kind of "Mandatory Critique" request from the panel of judges, who presumably have been selected based on the fact that their opinion and advice is respected and generally taken to be logically agreeable, if not necessarily emphatically agreeable.

This "Mandatory Critique"'s purpose, is multi-fold:
1)To give appropriate credit and acknowledgement to superb entries in respect to factors other than the final outcome of the sprite.
2)To encourage people to think about more than "Oh, that sprite's the most awesome, can't be bothered to look at the rest." if they are selected to be the judge.
3)This is more of an attribute of having a "Panel of Judges", but whatever: When left to votes by anyone and everyone, different people have different thresholds for deciding how good an entry is before they decide to vote for or not vote for them. This, coupled with different perspectives and opinions on the quality of the entries among voters, may cause a lousy representation of the overall opinion of entries in the vote count. A panel of judges would necessarily have a more unified qualification system or ruleset by which to determine the quality of the entries, and avoid such imbalances. (Okay, this may sound like a bunch of crap right now coz I'm sleepy and can't word it properly.... but I hope I got my point across.)

Anyway, maybe this isn't necessarily at all if the regular voters would all spend more time writing constructive criticisms for ALL entries when they vote... and I guess at this point I'm technically shooting myself... LOL.


Another system that might work is a "Rating" system.
Right now the voting system is a "multi-vote-poll-list" where voters can either vote for, or not vote for, any number of the entries.
This roughly translates to a 1 and 0 rating... in other words... either a "pass" or a "fail"
The threshold that determines whether an entry gets a 1 or 0 is different for everyone, and this disparity in the threshold -might- cause a tilt in the outcome of the poll, depending on individual voters' preferences.
However, changing the system to have voters rate entries on a scale of 1 to 10, would technically allow voters to give different levels of approval ratings for the entries, thus allowing them to "pass" all the entries, while still being able to contribute to distinguishing the entries by their quality, without being forced to "Fail" certain entries just to make that distinction between the "Good" sprites.. and the "Great" sprites.

[klodasmone]

(Click to View)

@Klod:
I'm just assuming here... but that system looks like it'd still only aggravate the situation.

The whole idea behind using a Judge Panel instead of a voting system is NOT to change how the best sprite is decided. Ideally, if both systems are functioning properly, they should both yield the same result.

The rationale of a Judge Panel, is essentially to act as a kind of "Mandatory Critique" request from the panel of judges, who presumably have been selected based on the fact that their opinion and advice is respected and generally taken to be logically agreeable, if not necessarily emphatically agreeable.

This "Mandatory Critique"'s purpose, is multi-fold:
1)To give appropriate credit and acknowledgement to superb entries in respect to factors other than the final outcome of the sprite.
2)To encourage people to think about more than "Oh, that sprite's the most awesome, can't be bothered to look at the rest." if they are selected to be the judge.
3)This is more of an attribute of having a "Panel of Judges", but whatever: When left to votes by anyone and everyone, different people have different thresholds for deciding how good an entry is before they decide to vote for or not vote for them. This, coupled with different perspectives and opinions on the quality of the entries among voters, may cause a lousy representation of the overall opinion of entries in the vote count. A panel of judges would necessarily have a more unified qualification system or ruleset by which to determine the quality of the entries, and avoid such imbalances. (Okay, this may sound like a bunch of crap right now coz I'm sleepy and can't word it properly.... but I hope I got my point across.)

Anyway, maybe this isn't necessarily at all if the regular voters would all spend more time writing constructive criticisms for ALL entries when they vote... and I guess at this point I'm technically shooting myself... LOL.


Another system that might work is a "Rating" system.
Right now the voting system is a "multi-vote-poll-list" where voters can either vote for, or not vote for, any number of the entries.
This roughly translates to a 1 and 0 rating... in other words... either a "pass" or a "fail"
The threshold that determines whether an entry gets a 1 or 0 is different for everyone, and this disparity in the threshold -might- cause a tilt in the outcome of the poll, depending on individual voters' preferences.
However, changing the system to have voters rate entries on a scale of 1 to 10, would technically allow voters to give different levels of approval ratings for the entries, thus allowing them to "pass" all the entries, while still being able to contribute to distinguishing the entries by their quality, without being forced to "Fail" certain entries just to make that distinction between the "Good" sprites.. and the "Great" sprites.

That's the most intelligible thing I've read on this whole forum. Who else agrees with the Sieg's "rate entries on a scale of 1 to 10" voting system? Because I certainly do.