Print

[Theforeshadower]

Theforeshadower

The new PotM voting suggestion

I personally think that if you vote, you should have to post about it.  I don't mean like 3 sentences or anything.  Just some quick reason why you voted for what you voted on.  Not only does it keep potential vote padding to a minimum, but it also helps those of us who have a project up for vote.  We get to see why another project got voted for instead of ours.  Helps us to work better to improve or understand what the members are looking for.  If we do get a vote, we can better understand what members like about our project.

I am not demanding you change it now, but the anonymous votes for the certain pokemon project is pretty obvious :/
Just something to re-think about in future PotM voting sessions.

• 

[FISSURE]

FISSURE

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

I personally think that if you vote, you should have to post about it.  I don't mean like 3 sentences or anything.  Just some quick reason why you voted for what you voted on.  Not only does it keep potential vote padding to a minimum, but it also helps those of us who have a project up for vote.  We get to see why another project got voted for instead of ours.  Helps us to work better to improve or understand what the members are looking for.  If we do get a vote, we can better understand what members like about our project.

I am not demanding you change it now, but the anonymous votes for the certain pokemon project is pretty obvious :/
Just something to re-think about in future PotM voting sessions.

Indeed, also all the newly registered names that i posted all registered within a minute of each other

[4Sword]

4Sword

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

The previous system had nominations requiring at least 3 sentences, but the voting only required 1 sentence minimum. At the time of me making that a requirement I still got !@#$% from users because they thought that was too damn much. Even when that died down there would still be users who did not care to post just 1 sentence at all even though it was almost always stated in nomination topics that their vote would only count if they did so.

The administration and possibly moderation is already able to see all of the users who voted for whatever options in a poll. But meh, the issue tends to be more of other users not demanding that all users mention why they voted; I share your opinion in that I had previously stated I thought it was be helpful to developers to get positive feedback about their work.

[FISSURE]

FISSURE

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

The previous system had nominations requiring at least 3 sentences, but the voting only required 1 sentence minimum. At the time of me making that a requirement I still got !@#$% from users because they thought that was too damn much. Even when that died down there would still be users who did not care to post just 1 sentence at all even though it was almost always stated in nomination topics that their vote would only count if they did so.

The administration and possibly moderation is already able to see all of the users who voted for whatever options in a poll. But meh, the issue tends to be more of other users not demanding that all users mention why they voted; I share your opinion in that I had previously stated I thought it was be helpful to developers to get positive feedback about their work.

The heck, how is writing one sentence too damn much for people? They want to vote, yet can't actually say why they voted. Only reason i haven't made a post saying who i voted for was because i voted pre-maturely without checking out all of the entries. People can't even write a sentence, that's just damn lazy.

[Zaeranos]

Zaeranos

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

The previous system had nominations requiring at least 3 sentences, but the voting only required 1 sentence minimum. At the time of me making that a requirement I still got !@#$% from users because they thought that was too damn much. Even when that died down there would still be users who did not care to post just 1 sentence at all even though it was almost always stated in nomination topics that their vote would only count if they did so.

The administration and possibly moderation is already able to see all of the users who voted for whatever options in a poll. But meh, the issue tends to be more of other users not demanding that all users mention why they voted; I share your opinion in that I had previously stated I thought it was be helpful to developers to get positive feedback about their work.

The heck, how is writing one sentence too damn much for people?

Because that requires clicking the 'reply' button, then punch in an X number of keys that has as criteria, that the letters coming from those keys should formulate existing (English) words and  those words needs to be a order in a certain manner that they give a meaningful message. And then they still need to click 'Post'. And when clicking the buttons people have to wait for the data to be transmitted and a new page being loaded.

Have you any idea how much time and work that takes

[Theforeshadower]

Theforeshadower

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

The previous system had nominations requiring at least 3 sentences, but the voting only required 1 sentence minimum. At the time of me making that a requirement I still got !@#$% from users because they thought that was too damn much. Even when that died down there would still be users who did not care to post just 1 sentence at all even though it was almost always stated in nomination topics that their vote would only count if they did so.

The administration and possibly moderation is already able to see all of the users who voted for whatever options in a poll. But meh, the issue tends to be more of other users not demanding that all users mention why they voted; I share your opinion in that I had previously stated I thought it was be helpful to developers to get positive feedback about their work.

The heck, how is writing one sentence too damn much for people?

Because that requires clicking the 'reply' button, then punch in an X number of keys that has as criteria, that the letters coming from those keys should formulate existing (English) words and  those words needs to be a order in a certain manner that they give a meaningful message. And then they still need to click 'Post'. And when clicking the buttons people have to wait for the data to be transmitted and a new page being loaded.

Have you any idea how much time and work that takes

10 seconds I can never get back.....now

Had to

• 

[Zaeranos]

Zaeranos

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

The previous system had nominations requiring at least 3 sentences, but the voting only required 1 sentence minimum. At the time of me making that a requirement I still got !@#$% from users because they thought that was too damn much. Even when that died down there would still be users who did not care to post just 1 sentence at all even though it was almost always stated in nomination topics that their vote would only count if they did so.

The administration and possibly moderation is already able to see all of the users who voted for whatever options in a poll. But meh, the issue tends to be more of other users not demanding that all users mention why they voted; I share your opinion in that I had previously stated I thought it was be helpful to developers to get positive feedback about their work.

The heck, how is writing one sentence too damn much for people?

Because that requires clicking the 'reply' button, then punch in an X number of keys that has as criteria, that the letters coming from those keys should formulate existing (English) words and  those words needs to be a order in a certain manner that they give a meaningful message. And then they still need to click 'Post'. And when clicking the buttons people have to wait for the data to be transmitted and a new page being loaded.

Have you any idea how much time and work that takes

10 seconds I can never get back.....now

Had to

And that is a lot for people. Damn another 10 seconds I can't get back.

[FISSURE]

FISSURE

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

The previous system had nominations requiring at least 3 sentences, but the voting only required 1 sentence minimum. At the time of me making that a requirement I still got !@#$% from users because they thought that was too damn much. Even when that died down there would still be users who did not care to post just 1 sentence at all even though it was almost always stated in nomination topics that their vote would only count if they did so.

The administration and possibly moderation is already able to see all of the users who voted for whatever options in a poll. But meh, the issue tends to be more of other users not demanding that all users mention why they voted; I share your opinion in that I had previously stated I thought it was be helpful to developers to get positive feedback about their work.

The heck, how is writing one sentence too damn much for people?

Because that requires clicking the 'reply' button, then punch in an X number of keys that has as criteria, that the letters coming from those keys should formulate existing (English) words and  those words needs to be a order in a certain manner that they give a meaningful message. And then they still need to click 'Post'. And when clicking the buttons people have to wait for the data to be transmitted and a new page being loaded.

Have you any idea how much time and work that takes

I understand, it is very long to write that one sentence. I am sorry i ever doubted the wonderful masses . But you wrote a paragraph, and more. I commend you for your ability to stay calm while writing all that out . It took me around 10 seconds to read that, i will sadly never get those 10 seconds. And another 10-20 to reply to this.

[Martijn dh]

Martijn dh

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

You know, the funny thing (and this may just at random, I know) is that there seems to be more voting and also more explaining of own votes now that you don't need to explain yourself. I'm not talking relatively but absolute. Personally I want to see what happens in the next couple of months before going back and forth. That and needing to explain yourself is harder to control for me. I'd have to check each individual vote for present reasoning and that takes time. And if you wish to change your vote (because a new project entered late or whatever) then you'd have to repost your choice(s) or you're messing up the system.

The other suggestion that was posted about people only being allowed to vote after having made at least 10 posts I love. If the option exists to do this then that's a great plan. I may also sightly help with the first section of the post because I see more "older" members taking the time to post what made them come to there choice.

While we're at it: I would also like to keep people from being able to vote for there own project. It's just poor sportsmanship. Votes should be earned.

You can also join the "Horn of Balance" community on:
Free demo: https://hornofbalance.itch.io/horn-of-balance-pre-ks-demo
Discord: https://discord.gg/redHXyZ2Gc
Twitter: https://twitter.com/HornofBalance
Kickstarter: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/hornofbalance/horn-of-balance

[FISSURE]

FISSURE

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

You know, the funny thing (and this may just at random, I know) is that there seems to be more voting and also more explaining of own votes now that you don't need to explain yourself. I'm not talking relatively but absolute. Personally I want to see what happens in the next couple of months before going back and forth. That and needing to explain yourself is harder to control for me. I'd have to check each individual vote for present reasoning and that takes time. And if you wish to change your vote (because a new project entered late or whatever) then you'd have to repost your choice(s) or you're messing up the system.

The other suggestion that was posted about people only being allowed to vote after having made at least 10 posts I love. If the option exists to do this then that's a great plan. I may also sightly help with the first section of the post because I see more "older" members taking the time to post what made them come to there choice.

While we're at it: I would also like to keep people from being able to vote for there own project. It's just poor sportsmanship. Votes should be earned.

The 10 post requirement is a good idea, but it does open up the possibility of people signing up, and just posting spam in 10 random topics to get their count up, Although it seems much easier to monitor with the way the recent posts on the bottom of the forum is setup, doesn't take long to see who has posted what.

[Mamoruanime]

Mamoruanime

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

I don't know why it couldn't easily be 100 posts required with the exception of people *with a project* being allowed to vote.

I just see people posting 10 random topics to get their count up, Although it seems much easier to monitor with the way the recent posts on the bottom of the forum is setup, doesn't take long to see who has posted hwat.

[Zaeranos]

Zaeranos

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

The problem is what qualifies as a ZFGC member and what doesn't.

[Mamoruanime]

Mamoruanime

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

The problem is what qualifies as a ZFGC member and what doesn't.

Well; "member" implies someone who's active in the community. Not people who sign up to lurk or vote. Someone who's active will have a certain post count. I think if there's any use for it at all it's that :p

[Martijn dh]

Martijn dh

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

Now we're talking about the difference members and elite members I think 100 posts far outshoots the original goal which is simply to prevent people from inviting 18 random friends who come, immediatly vote and leave again. Having a 10-post recuirement is more then sufficient. It raises the effort required for outsiders to vote considerably while not for bothering anybody else.

You can also join the "Horn of Balance" community on:
Free demo: https://hornofbalance.itch.io/horn-of-balance-pre-ks-demo
Discord: https://discord.gg/redHXyZ2Gc
Twitter: https://twitter.com/HornofBalance
Kickstarter: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/hornofbalance/horn-of-balance

[Mamoruanime]

Mamoruanime

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

Well; I suppose. But again as Fissure stated it's easy for them to make 10 really ridiculous posts just so they can vote. I see that as only breeding spam. Gotta have the bar high enough to where they won't spam the !@#$% outta the forum, and keep it low enough to where it's not intimidating for them to participate.

100 posts is a really really easy goal (hell; my first week at ZFGC back when it opened I had 100... that was with 64 members total!); just gotta join in on the discussion.

Also, 100 posts is far from elite If you want elite, try 10,000+, or even 22,000 (which is my lifetime of ZFGC total ... 10,000+ is therabidwombat's count)

[Wasabi]

Wasabi

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

At the rate I've been posting this year I'm begginning to wonder if I'll get to 3000 before the end of it...

Your community is a bunch of stuck up turds.

[Zaeranos]

Zaeranos

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

Well, that is why I suggested a minimum post count for anonymous voting. Thus it would be far more easier to make 1 post to state as voting than to get 10, 20 or even 50 posts on the topic. But then again no system will be absolute fool proof.

[Mirby]

Mirby

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

I think Mammy's got a point.

And now I miss TRW...

I think it's his fault I'm wombat-fixated.

Mirby Studios | Share & Enjoy now available! (Links above!) | Games I've Beaten

I like-like it

• 

[Zaeranos]

Zaeranos

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

While we're at it: I would also like to keep people from being able to vote for there own project. It's just poor sportsmanship. Votes should be earned.

That is why it is called sportsmanship. It is a courtesy, even though the possibility is there. Just when it comes to a tie, let an own vote count for less. Otherwise projects with large teams have a lot of votes the projects can't get.

[4Sword]

4Sword

Re: The new PotM voting suggestion

I never really had an issue with team members voting for their own project, it is a positive bias which is though subtle means encourages more team projects. I agree with Niek though, in there is a tie for top winner, the votes of only those who were not team members can be used to assess who should be the winner.