Jump to content
Kastor

Serious changes to the awards (2019-2020)

Recommended Posts

A few changes I'm considering:

 

1. A "historian* basically someone who has been in the community a bit, around 25-50 people, who vote on the ballots of those who you've nominated. These would be for the Player/Alliance categories only.

2. Everyone else votes on everything else, Community categories.

 

To make sure the #1 was fair, it would be 1 person from everyone top 25 alliances, and then 25 people picked by the community(read, me)

 

Basically, it would apply points to every person, ranging from 10 points to 0, and then anyone not awarded would be given a 0 and the total points would be added together and that person/alliance would win.

 

Another category I'd want to add is an "All-PnW" player award. 

 

Basically very similar to the NBA, there's 2 terms and it highlights the best players of PnW for the past year. This would be decided by community vote and "Historian" vote.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would you measure the top 25 alliances? 

Most of the alliances in Orbis, especially the major ones, are at war, and their score is either hyperinflated or deflated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Mr. Goober said:

How would you measure the top 25 alliances? 

Most of the alliances in Orbis, especially the major ones, are at war, and their score is either hyperinflated or deflated. 

You missed the only part he's interested in.

31 minutes ago, Kastor said:

and then 25 people picked by the community(read, me)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(The actual numbers make winning unsustainable)

(Change the system to weigh it more in your favor and marginalize the majority)

Hoo boy is this the 2019 Republican Party or what

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

1. A "historian* basically someone who has been in the community a bit, around 25-50 people, who vote on the ballots of those who you've nominated. These would be for the Player/Alliance categories only.

2. Everyone else votes on everything else, Community categories.

 

To make sure the #1 was fair, it would be 1 person from everyone top 25 alliances, and then 25 people picked by the community(read, me)

 

Basically, it would apply points to every person, ranging from 10 points to 0, and then anyone not awarded would be given a 0 and the total points would be added together and that person/alliance would win.

These are politicized every year because it's the nature of the beast. Every year, there's someone whining about them being "unfair," "unobjective," or otherwise "rigged."

The reason they are politicized is because they're "official."  They have their own dedicated subforum here and the results are displayed in-game.

We're never going to achieve a "fair" or "objective" outcome by changing the process unless that change makes the awards unofficial - not held in their own special subforum, and not recorded in-game. If those aren't being considered (and it appears they aren't), then I'll say what I say every year: host these in-game or here on the forums, and use a directly democratic voting process for all the awards. That's closer to "fair" than any other method.

 

I'd encourage you or anyone else interested in a discussion between better-informed players to have one on the side.  A discussion thread separate from the voting thread(s) in here seems reasonable. An radio show run in parallel with these (although not integrated with the awards) with a guest list comprised of "historians" would also be interesting.

Edited by Edward I
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Edward I said:

These are politicized every year because it's the nature of the beast. Every year, there's someone whining about them being "unfair," "unobjective," or otherwise "rigged."

The reason they are politicized is because they're "official."  They have their own dedicated subforum here and the results are displayed in-game.

We'll never going to achieve a "fair" or "objective" outcome by changing the process unless that change makes the awards unofficial - not held in their own special subforum, and not recorded in-game. If those aren't being considered (and it appears they aren't), then I'll say what I say every year: host these in-game or here on the forums, and use a directly democratic voting process for all the awards. That's closer to "fair" than any other method.

 

I'd encourage you or anyone else interested in a discussion between better-informed players to have one on the side.  A discussion thread separate from the voting thread(s) in here seems reasonable. An radio show run in parallel with these (although not integrated with the awards) with a guest list comprised of "historians" would also be interesting.

The fairest way this has ever been done was last year, and IQ won, so moving it on the forums isn't really that fair to the people who don't or can't(very important) use the forums. 

The same setup in terms of voting are going to be done the same way as last year, more than likely, this is just a discussion on a new way to make it *fair*

 

Also Leo, no one is saying that I *own* this. These are some changes I've been mulling over. I'm not sure "You don't own these" is very valid or fair, considering I started it and have hosted it the most. I have the right to throw out ideas and ask questions to the people. "No" isn't a valid response, tell me why you don't like something or do like something. Lets talk and discuss things. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kastor said:

The fairest way this has ever been done was last year, and IQ won, so moving it on the forums isn't really that fair to the people who don't or can't(very important) use the forums

“They were fair last year and IQ won, they must be wrong!”
 

Open voting and nominations on the forums is the only acceptable measure that is transparent and fair. 

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Leo the Great said:

“They were fair last year and IQ won, they must be wrong!”
 

Open voting and nominations on the forums is the only acceptable measure that is transparent and fair. 

Open nominations on the forums is fair, and very fair.

 

Open voting for EVERYONE in PnW is wayyy more fair than just forum voting. 

 

Also, you're literally misquoting me in my post. Can you not read what I said?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kastor said:

Open nominations on the forums is fair, and very fair.

 

Open voting for EVERYONE in PnW is wayyy more fair than just forum voting. 

 

Also, you're literally misquoting me in my post. Can you not read what I said?

Im reading how you try to change it every year to try and limit a specific faction from winning. It’s quite clear. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Edward I said:

These are politicized every year because it's the nature of the beast. Every year, there's some whining about them being "unfair," "unobjective," or otherwise "rigged."

The reason they are politicized is because they're "official."  They have their own dedicated subforum here and the results are displayed in-game.

We'll never going to achieve a "fair" or "objective" outcome by changing the process unless that change makes the awards unofficial - not held in their own special subforum, and not recorded in-game. If those aren't being considered (and it appears they aren't), then I'll say what I say every year: host these in-game or here on the forums, and use a directly democratic voting process for all the awards. That's closer to "fair" than any other method.

 

I'd encourage you or anyone else interested in a discussion between better-informed players to have one on the side.  A discussion thread separate from the voting thread(s) in here seems reasonable. An radio show run in parallel with these (although not integrated with the awards) with a guest list comprised of "historians" would also be interesting.

I actually agree with Edward. I'd prefer seeing these awards become unofficial without ingame impact again.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Leo the Great said:

Im reading how you try to change it every year to try and limit a specific faction from winning. It’s quite clear. 

You've won every year that I've hosted them and then the years I haven't. Who exactly am I trying to limit from winning?

Just now, Prefonteen said:

I actually agree with Edward. I'd prefer seeing these awards become unofficial without ingame impact again.

They aren't really official. You can choose to display them or not, its a cosmetic addition. I'm not sure why this is suddenly an issue when its always been like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would restrict the votes only to players with X number of forum posts (20? 50?) and positive reputation for two reasons:

1. Some categories are about this forum so makes sense that only people who post here can vote

2. I hope it encourages the use of the forum

 

Your system is not very good so I suggest to try it because why not and still keep the old system as the official one, curious to see the differences with the two systems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Kastor said:

The fairest way this has ever been done was last year, and IQ won, so moving it on the forums isn't really that fair to the people who don't or can't(very important) use the forums.

It was hosted off-site last year and the results were initially revealed in a player-controlled, non-official Discord server. That's a bad management/moderation practice, and it shouldn't be repeated this year. So I'd be very disappointed if the setup was the same as last year, especially since, as I recall, Alex offered to host them in-game this year.

25 minutes ago, Kastor said:

The same setup in terms of voting are going to be done the same way as last year, more than likely, this is just a discussion on a new way to make it *fair*

Either you articulated your original idea poorly or this is wrong, because the way I and several others read your OP was that a significant number of the awards would be voted on by only 50 people, half of whom would be chosen by you. If that's the case, then we don't have anywhere near the same definition of "fair."

 

18 minutes ago, Kastor said:

They aren't really official. You can choose to display them or not, its a cosmetic addition. I'm not sure why this is suddenly an issue when its always been like this.

They are. They have a dedicated subforum here, which is a moderation decision and lends them an imprimatur of legitimacy. Displaying them in-game unfairly inflates the images of the alliances that win the positive awards. I don't think it's any better for alliances to trick noobs into thinking their friends are the best than it would be if they could trick noobs into thinking their rivals are the worst.

Just now, Micchan said:

I would restrict the votes only to players with X number of forum posts (20? 50?) and positive reputation for two reasons:

1. Some categories are about this forum so makes sense that only people who post here can vote

2. I hope it encourages the use of the forum

You can read the forum without posting on it, so this doesn't make sense even on its own terms.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After all these years Kastor I thought by now you'd realise thinking isn't your greatest forte.😋 We've got enough corruption issues in the community as is.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Edward I said:

It was hosted off-site last year and the results were initially revealed in a player-controlled, non-official Discord server. That's a bad management/moderation practice, and it shouldn't be repeated this year. So I'd be very disappointed if the setup was the same as last year, especially since, as I recall, Alex offered to host them in-game this year.

Either you articulated your original idea poorly or this is wrong, because the way I and several others read your OP was that a significant number of the awards would be voted on by only 50 people, half of whom would be chosen by you. If that's the case, then we don't have anywhere near the same definition of "fair."

 

They are. They have a dedicated subforum here, which is a moderation decision and lends them an imprimatur of legitimacy. Displaying them in-game unfairly inflates the images of the alliances that win the positive awards. I don't think it's any better for alliances to trick noobs into thinking their friends are the best than it would be if they could trick noobs into thinking their rivals are the worst.

You can read the forum without posting on it, so this doesn't make sense even on its own terms.

1. Why not? All the data was released and people independent of the event confirmed that the numbers looked correct.

2. Correct, 25 people from the top 25 alliances, and 25 people(that I'd announce), if anything, I've been one of the fairest people on the forums within the last year.

3. Someone is upset, look Alex has said that the awards would be ran by players and for players, and that he doesn't want to run them. I'm not sure what you want me to do about this, we go through this every year. People get upset over WHOEVER runs the awards, and say its bias. I've came with new ideas and now you guys want old ones. 

 

This is something thats supposed to be a fun thing to do on the end of the year to reflect on the previous year, I run the awards because I like revisiting things that happened. I don't care who wins what enough to rig it. I just think running it the same old way every year is boring. We did it on the forums one year and barely anyone talked about it, the discord server was almost filled with people and we had more people participate than ever before when we did it last year. I'm not opposed to keeping it the same as last year, but we're past hosting it on the forums. If Alex doesn't want me to do that, he can come and host it himself, but to alienate MAJORITY of the game because you don't like it is ridiculous. People liked the awards last year and were the most active ever. I'm not going to go back to what had the worst activity and least active award. 

 

4. Yes, but you have to make an account, and there are LITERAL people who cannot join these forums, for various reasons. Some just don't want too, but this gives EVERYONE a chance to vote and participate in the awards. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kastor said:

You've won every year that I've hosted them and then the years I haven't. Who exactly am I trying to limit from winning?

They aren't really official. You can choose to display them or not, its a cosmetic addition. I'm not sure why this is suddenly an issue when its always been like this.

it hasn't always been like this :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Kastor said:

1. Why not? All the data was released and people independent of the event confirmed that the numbers looked correct.

Principle. If these are going to be wedded to the game and its moderation - again, they have their own subforum and they can be displayed in-game, so they definitely are - then they should be conducted and recorded, start to finish, on infrastructure controlled by the game's admins and moderation staff.

22 minutes ago, Kastor said:

2. Correct, 25 people from the top 25 alliances, and 25 people(that I'd announce), if anything, I've been one of the fairest people on the forums within the last year.

That's silly. It's also definitely worse and less "fair" than a popular straw poll.

22 minutes ago, Kastor said:

3. Someone is upset, look Alex has said that the awards would be ran by players and for players, and that he doesn't want to run them. I'm not sure what you want me to do about this, we go through this every year. People get upset over WHOEVER runs the awards, and say its bias. I've came with new ideas and now you guys want old ones. 

Not upset, just disappointed. We don't dislike your idea because it's new; we dislike it because it's bad.

22 minutes ago, Kastor said:

This is something thats supposed to be a fun thing to do on the end of the year to reflect on the previous year, I run the awards because I like revisiting things that happened. I don't care who wins what enough to rig it.

Then focus on the discussion, not the voting. We don't need a poorly designed, counter-majoritarian process when direct democracy has always worked just fine.

22 minutes ago, Kastor said:

I just think running it the same old way every year is boring.

Change for its own sake isn't a good reason to alter anything.

22 minutes ago, Kastor said:

We did it on the forums one year and barely anyone talked about it, the discord server was almost filled with people and we had more people participate than ever before when we did it last year.

There are almost certainly more daily/weekly forum users than there were people on that Discord server, so the first half doesn't make sense.

I said I'd be fine with a vote happening in-game last year; I'd be fine with that this year.

22 minutes ago, Kastor said:

I'm not opposed to keeping it the same as last year, but we're past hosting it on the forums. If Alex doesn't want me to do that, he can come and host it himself, but to alienate MAJORITY of the game because you don't like it is ridiculous. People liked the awards last year and were the most active ever. I'm not going to go back to what had the worst activity and least active award. 

It's not your decision to make. You're not "the community" and you don't speak for a "majority of the game."

22 minutes ago, Kastor said:

4. Yes, but you have to make an account, and there are LITERAL people who cannot join these forums, for various reasons. Some just don't want too, but this gives EVERYONE a chance to vote and participate in the awards. 

I suggested doing it in-game.

And not wanting to make an account here isn't the same as being unable to join, so I have no idea what you're getting at there.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kastor what about a voting system based on Eurovision?
A system effectively designed to make it fair for countries with different sized populations, to compete against one another, in a democratic way.

First of there is a popular vote, where there is no voting on ones own alliance, or members. 
Then the popular vote is converted into percentages, over how many of the total voters voted on an alliance to the desired category, where that is easily converted into point, by 1% of vote, equal 1 point. 
While each participating alliance provide a Jury. 
The Jury shall rank their voting, as in they have to rank a list of alliance that fit best into the voting categories. An example, "the best flag", they assign let set 10-12 alliance, with 1-10 point. With the most point to the alliance flag they like the best, second highest point to the alliance they like the second best, and so on. 

Then the point from the popular vote and jury would be added together for a final score. 

That seem the most fair to me. Where you can ague over allowing alliance members to vote for their own alliance, how many members an alliance should have to provide a jury member, and how many point the popular and juries should be able to provide. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Edward I said:

 

You can read the forum without posting on it, so this doesn't make sense even on its own terms.

 

Never liked who only reads, they are like that one guy in the school project who does nothing but thanks to the others gets the good vote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everybody knows that the winners of these things are always the ones with the best username / avatar / nation combos.

Sorry anime avatar users but your waifu is trash u_u.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one like the council of top 25 AA representatives idea  (wish  it could be Top50 though to include some of the more good micros too). Just do both  public vote and council vote to contrast the public which is always  the AA with more members winning and council which hopefully doesn´t come down to everyone getting their own vote and reflects some "objective" stuff...   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.