Proposed changes to competition logistics

I’m with Jasko on this one and would be fine with honors system approach.

The way I understand it, spot checking after the fact could in theory be done as a means of enforcement. Without the burden on the staff to interject on the automation.

2 Likes

Yeah, personally I’d prefer having the option of 1-3 votes, especially if the votes are not ranked. If I really really love 2 out of 18 entries and then there are 4 I basically like equally, having the option to only vote twice would be best. But hey, it’s not a big deal if we have three forced votes either, whatever most people agree on here.

Really? I would have no problems with it. Again, we’re a fun little hobby group and have plastic toy soldiers painting competitions. I think it’s totally fine saying “you are not allowed to vote for yourself” or something, even if it is technically possible to do so and nobody checks it. So yeah, if someone wants to “cheat” here and vote for himself, by all means, you do you. For me it’s quite similar to the BATG rules. In the end, nothing here really matters. But automatic voting without a recount by hand makes the life of the admins much easier, so lets just do that.

1 Like

Yes, my logic is:
If it is accepted, then allow it. But don’t make people feel bad or left in doubt if they do accepted things. Or give entries effectively more votes if their makers are less inclined to doubt.
Just don’t confuse people.
Well, something like this. ^^

If it is not accepted, don’t allow it by rules and with the possibility of being checked, as discussed above.
This would be the other (fair) option. In this case voting for less than 3 would be a minor thing and everything basically stays as it was but with at least some automation.

Honestly… i dont think admiral actually checks if the numbers that are sent in by voters arent their own entries. Its just Another extra step that takes a lot of time. To put the time in perspective, it cost me at least 2 hours per post. Now i know i am slower than admiral due to it being my first time, but this means a full competiton takes between 6 and 8 hours of the staffs time. Time that could be spend with family, painting, doing other stuff. I love the competitions, but if that could be brought down to maybe 30 minutes… that would be a lot more fun of us. It would mean less delays, less pressure on us.

If it would make you feel better i can check the last x competitions for people that voted on themselves… i suspect there will be none.

At the risk of getting another explosion of negativity…

i want to ask for this tread NOT to become a repetition of the previous competition thread… discussion is fine but at some point if a suggestion is not accepted by others we have to let it go. Please… no endless discussion on “my opinion is better then yours”.

If this is not possible i will simply just… choose what i think is best.

4 Likes

I’m assuming doubt would be erased by reading a clear set of rules. It will definitely be incumbent upon everyone to read the new rules when they are finalized to make this all work.

People should curl up in shame for committing such injustice… and passing up on the opportunity to honor one of the 10 to 20 other worthy entries of their comrades. What would a victory even mean at that cost! I shudder to think who would toot their own horn if an automated system theoretically permits it. - kidding around, but also not

Thanks Jasko for the brain bleach.

1 Like

I suppose it would even suffice if you tell that you might check the winners if their votes are alright and most of the time not check anything. :wink:

I would never try to talk you into something as time-consuming and probably boring as the manual count of votes, it wouldn’t be fair either.

The ideal of a discussion is an exchange of arguments people consider worth looking at, not pressing an unchangeable opinion.
There shouldn’t happen anything bad as long as we all know this. :smile:

Well, since we’re taking the voting so seriously :smiley: what is to stop people from just… making 20 disposable accounts and voting for themselves? :smiley:

i suggest we limit the polls to only people in trust level 1 can vote.

Get to trust level 1 by…

  • Entering at least 5 topics
  • Reading at least 30 posts
  • Spend a total of 10 minutes reading posts

imo a very low treshold to achieve (in one night even) but way too high for cheating (who will do this 15 times for a voucher oif 30 euros?)

this is an automatic system, so except for setting the level once it does not require extra work. It does however weed out almost 200 accounts that cant vote anymore, but from what i see they don’t vote anyway.

5 Likes

Not even a bad idea. If putting the forum software to some use anyway, this would look like a nice application for making the system more… idk, elaborate and consistent, I guess?

What is about these 200 accs? They can’t be silent lurkers if there isn’t even a post required for trust level 1.

I’d support this one.
And I’d always support talking seriously about questions asked, as you might guess. :wink:

1 Like

Trust lvl 1 seems a good level to set it to. Not overly burdensome to participate.

And I don’t think for the most part anyone would really vote for themselves.

Would the whole poll be viewable after it’s closed to everyone or still only staff? I only ask cause I have a strong feeling I haven’t gotten any votes which is fine cause everyone’s stuff is light years ahead of me in painting skill and ability to create a awesome diorama I’m just happy to have my half assed work set next to it. But some one may be bummed or disappointed/discouraged if they saw they did 15-20 hours of work on a project and got not a single vote. And maybe not join in the next round. As much as I want to see if anyone liked what I did, i may just suggest that we still don’t know.

those 200 accounts don’t comply with all the requirements stated above.

  • Entering at least 5 topics
  • Reading at least 30 posts
  • Spend a total of 10 minutes reading posts

i think they are not even lurkers. Just people who joined and left.

2 Likes

If they left they are probably not interested in voting then. ^^

Both is possible, but i’d prefer it not be visible to all. Not to hide the winners, but because beside the top 3 (or 4 if there is a tie) it doesnt serve a positive purpose to show them. If someone votes dead last all the time they’ll stop entering the comps. If they didnt win… they might still enter!

Oh… hahaha. You got votes mate, not dead last.

3 Likes

I surely should not have, have you seen what I’ve done? I’m lucky to not have been banned so far.

Here in the south my entry’s would be relegated to a “bless his heart” or a “oh sugar”

2 Likes

hahaha that got me! haha

3 Likes

Voting for one’s self.

If someone needs to vote for their own entry even if it’s against the rules in order to get through the day, let them. Clearly a fragile ego that needs some help at play :joy:

7 Likes

The contest entrants dont need votes to win, theyhave won already. Would you have ever attempted a big project without the contest? (I probably wouldn’t have or might give up half way through) this is why i like the big crazy build contests the most because its doomed without the pressure to finish to a deadline and join in the fun (sometimes a bit of pain too).

7 Likes

So very much agree! 50% of my standard playable army has come from projects started/completed for these contests over the years.

While nice to make it into the podium once in a while, win or lose, these are a huge motivation to get stuff done!

The members here are overwhelmingly a great crew, whom I believe will have no issue not voting for their own entries. If some outlier feels the need to break the rule, I’m not going to loose any sleep over it.

3 Likes