Xenthos2008-01-02 22:02:48
QUOTE(Xavius @ Jan 2 2008, 04:49 PM) 472234
There aren't many tens out there. I've been on what seems like tons (it's Wednesday and I have twenty hours logged this week) and I'm only a seven. I like the 1-5 better myself. If you're reasonably active, you should have a full vote.
There are a lot more tens than you think, it seems.
Daganev2008-01-02 22:03:59
QUOTE(Fireweaver @ Jan 2 2008, 01:46 PM) 472232
I'm going to throw my hat in for the 1-3 system.
The 1-10 can sway elections WAAAY to much.
If 4 people with 10s vote for Person A, he gets 40 votes.
If 7 people with 5s vote for Person B, he gets 35 votes.
Now that's a rather rare situation, but we all get the picture.
With 1-3, it would more accuratly show the majority.
If the the B voters had 2 and the A 3, then B would have 14 and A 12.
The 1-10 can sway elections WAAAY to much.
If 4 people with 10s vote for Person A, he gets 40 votes.
If 7 people with 5s vote for Person B, he gets 35 votes.
Now that's a rather rare situation, but we all get the picture.
With 1-3, it would more accuratly show the majority.
If the the B voters had 2 and the A 3, then B would have 14 and A 12.
The admin apparently have numbers and statistics behind their 10 point scale which I think seems fair.
I have a 7, I think a 7 feels right for me (or maybe an 8), as I don't play as much anymore. However, if it was a 3 point scale, I would be pissed if I was regulated to a 2 instead of 3.
Xenthos2008-01-02 22:05:33
QUOTE(daganev @ Jan 2 2008, 05:03 PM) 472249
The admin apparently have numbers and statistics behind their 10 point scale which I think seems fair.
I have a 7, I think a 7 feels right for me (or maybe an 8), as I don't play as much anymore. However, if it was a 3 point scale, I would be pissed if I was regulated to a 2 instead of 3.
I have a 7, I think a 7 feels right for me (or maybe an 8), as I don't play as much anymore. However, if it was a 3 point scale, I would be pissed if I was regulated to a 2 instead of 3.
Why the heck would you be "pissed"? 7 vs. 10 is about 1/3 less... 2 instead of 3 is about 1/3 less, but means your vote has MORE impact in relation (a difference of 1, instead of a difference of 3). Further, 2 would be the "average," which, given your play time, is about right. Why would getting twice the impact of an inactive person piss you off? :/
Unknown2008-01-02 22:08:07
QUOTE(Xenthos @ Jan 2 2008, 04:05 PM) 472250
Why the heck would you be "pissed"? 7 vs. 10 is about 1/3 less... 2 instead of 3 is about 1/3 less, but means your vote has MORE impact in relation (a difference of 1, instead of a difference of 3). Further, 2 would be the "average," which, given your play time, is about right. Why would getting twice the impact of an inactive person piss you off? :/
YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE T... oh, wait. Sorry. Thought this was the "Two Things" thread.
Daganev2008-01-02 22:12:33
Its not correct for me to be worth a 3.
However, I also don't think its correct for my vote to be equal to the vote of a person who plays once a weak.
At the same time, I don't think a person who plays once a week, should be restricted to the same vote as a person who plays once a month.
However, I also don't think its correct for my vote to be equal to the vote of a person who plays once a weak.
At the same time, I don't think a person who plays once a week, should be restricted to the same vote as a person who plays once a month.
Daganev2008-01-02 22:16:07
I don't have the time right now, but somebody should put up a sample spread in a guild election.
its not going to be all 10s vs all 7s or all 2s vs all 3s.
its not going to be all 10s vs all 7s or all 2s vs all 3s.
Noola2008-01-02 22:18:32
Daganev and Xenthos reminded me of the best bit from the Spinal Tap movie:
If I was as cool as Dem, I'd so alter that to make it fit better and thus inspire more to laugh than just me (which I fear is the case here! ). But I'm not.
QUOTE
Nigel Tufnel: The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board, eleven, eleven, eleven and...
Marty DiBergi: Oh, I see. And most amps go up to ten?
Nigel Tufnel: Exactly.
Marty DiBergi: Does that mean it's louder? Is it any louder?
Nigel Tufnel: Well, it's one louder, isn't it? It's not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at ten. You're on ten here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on ten on your guitar. Where can you go from there? Where?
Marty DiBergi: I don't know.
Nigel Tufnel: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?
Marty DiBergi: Put it up to eleven.
Nigel Tufnel: Eleven. Exactly. One louder.
Marty DiBergi: Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?
Nigel Tufnel: These go to eleven.
Marty DiBergi: Oh, I see. And most amps go up to ten?
Nigel Tufnel: Exactly.
Marty DiBergi: Does that mean it's louder? Is it any louder?
Nigel Tufnel: Well, it's one louder, isn't it? It's not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at ten. You're on ten here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on ten on your guitar. Where can you go from there? Where?
Marty DiBergi: I don't know.
Nigel Tufnel: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?
Marty DiBergi: Put it up to eleven.
Nigel Tufnel: Eleven. Exactly. One louder.
Marty DiBergi: Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?
Nigel Tufnel: These go to eleven.
If I was as cool as Dem, I'd so alter that to make it fit better and thus inspire more to laugh than just me (which I fear is the case here! ). But I'm not.
Unknown2008-01-02 22:23:21
QUOTE(Noola @ Jan 2 2008, 04:18 PM) 472256
Daganev and Xenthos reminded me of the best bit from the Spinal Tap movie:
If I was as cool as Dem, I'd so alter that to make it fit better and thus inspire more to laugh than just me (which I fear is the case here! ). But I'm not.
If I was as cool as Dem, I'd so alter that to make it fit better and thus inspire more to laugh than just me (which I fear is the case here! ). But I'm not.
No, that scene's always funny.
Verithrax2008-01-02 23:30:25
QUOTE(daganev @ Jan 2 2008, 07:03 PM) 472249
The admin apparently have numbers and statistics behind their 10 point scale which I think seems fair.
Do I get to call bullcrap on that? You haven't supported your assertions... the admin haven't even said so.
Morgfyre2008-01-02 23:31:19
QUOTE(Xavius @ Jan 2 2008, 03:49 PM) 472234
There aren't many tens out there. I've been on what seems like tons (it's Wednesday and I have twenty hours logged this week) and I'm only a seven. I like the 1-5 better myself. If you're reasonably active, you should have a full vote.
The voting strength takes into account your activity over the past month. Thus, while it is possible to raise your strength somewhat by being very active over a given week, it is impossible to raise it to the highest tiers of activity in such a short time if you were not already close.
Morgfyre2008-01-02 23:33:36
QUOTE(Verithrax @ Jan 2 2008, 05:30 PM) 472269
Do I get to call bullcrap on that? You haven't supported your assertions... the admin haven't even said so.
We actually did do quite a bit of statistic gathering when coming up with the activity tiers. There were 2 previous incarnations of the voting weight tiers (including the initial proposal) that we rejected because they disenfranchised too many players or didn't cater to the average Lusternian's activity levels.
Daganev2008-01-02 23:49:47
QUOTE(Verithrax @ Jan 2 2008, 03:30 PM) 472269
Do I get to call bullcrap on that? You haven't supported your assertions... the admin haven't even said so.
From the announce post:
QUOTE
What this means is that your vote is weighted based on how often and how
long you are log in over time. Thus, the votes of players who are active
have a greater weight than those who are not. The vote weight ranges
from 1 to 10 (you may see the weight of your vote on STATUS). We have
run a lot of analysis to determine the best way to weight votes. As it
is, over 60% of active players will have their votes weighted in the
range of 5-10. Over 75% of active players will have their votes in the
range of 4-10.
Valaria2008-01-04 08:49:51
hmm the moment voting weight came in. i check my stat.. Guess what? it is 10. 1 0. ten.
i guess i suppose i will be extreme influenceful in any incoming elections. *hum*
on other hand i think i play too often indeed. hmm.
i guess i suppose i will be extreme influenceful in any incoming elections. *hum*
on other hand i think i play too often indeed. hmm.
Neuf2008-01-08 11:08:39
At least you play. If any chained forger does not have a 10 under this new system, I'll be laughing. As for whether it will work better than the old system of equal weighted voting, we'll find out at the next politically motivated mess of an election.
Tekora2008-01-08 21:23:58
My vote value went up a point this week.
(And no, I won't say what it is)
(And no, I won't say what it is)