Future STGT Guidelines (STGT '08 Rule Changes?)

[Icarus]

Since the committee thing seems to be nicely sorted, I'm bumping and jumping to the next question...

Code: Select all

Change voting rules entirely to private or attempt to perfect our current public method.
Subquestion: approve revised "In-Case Shit"

... and putting down a big HELL NO on changing the voting to private. Guessing the shortlist; team voting strategy; and the drama that accompanies the voting week were the best parts of the tournament. Moving to private takes the fun out of it.

Therefore:



I dunno about improving the "in-case of..." clauses however. I think they were fine as they are.

[Rob]

Private - the chosen game would be more of a surprise, less chance to practice before the week starts.

[Pirate1019]

Public voting seconded. Interweb drama. huzzah!

[Rob]

Public voting seconded. Interweb drama. huzzah!

I guarantee not to say anything about voting, so there will be no drama!

Private. The surprise would be more fun and there would be less people afraid to vote for a losing game (which of course assures fewer and fewer votes for it).

[freddiebamboo]

Public please, we just need a sensible shortlist of games for it to work.

[DJ Incompetent]

Thank you. My kitchen is kinda...sorta....erm....dripping into my basement -_-;;;;


Pretty black or white issue.

Do we want voting in public shortlist vote threads exactly like STGT '06?

Or do we want a method of private (probably PM) voting for the shortlists?

Both styles of voting would be based on the exact publically known 5-choice shortlists per week.

Public:
+more lively, social, suspenseful, and a smidge of entertaining drama
+early heads up on what files to scout & download
-people can count results early, then alter their voting habits, radically changing "what could have been"
-Allows a short time for early practice, depending on landslides.

Private:
+Forces the most honest votes
+discourages early game practice
-far less social and less eventful
-voting depends on 100% trust on organizers (& non-maxed PM inboxes) (fewer checks & balances)



for the record, I vote for Public. I liked the atmosphere of the socializing, propaganda, and fox news commentary. p-shopping is always funny.

Code: Select all

Subquestion: approve revised "In-Case Shit"

All I really needed to add was that I would examine context of when people quickly changed their votes far from the deadline before disqualifying everybody. I bet I was kinda an over-dick on that in the name of fairness. I was assuming to do this. I just wanted to make sure if anybody had anything to add or object to.

[Rob]

+early heads up on what files to scout & download

Should take a few minutes max.

Voting doesn't need to be an "event," seriously. There's a week of playing, results, talk of the following week's theme and whatever else.

[Edge]

I think both voting systems have it's fair pros and cons. But how would you go with doing the private votes, technically?

hmm... everyone sending a pm would kill your inbox... Maybe a team captain could tally all votes from his teammembers and then you'd only get pms from the captains. For tranaparency all voters data could then be postet with the voteresults.

That said I am not really sure if private votes would turn out better. A good point is people wouldn't vote strategical and therefore not avoid the losing horse. But maybe it is better to go with public voting, for the socializing aspect and the possibilty to vote strategically isn't too bad.

[Rob]

I think both voting systems have it's fair pros and cons. But how would you go with doing the private votes, technically?

1. maybe create a separate account and name it "STGT07" or something (to not clutter a personal inbox)
2. people pm with their vote IN THE PM SUBJECT to make it easy

Were there 50+ votes a round? I can't remember. But it'd be easy to check, tally and delete a group before 50 is hit.

This method would also eliminate having to go through pages of a thread and potentially miss votes sandwiched between irrelevant posts. (Remembers a certain recount, recount, recount.)

[Danny]

Perhaps you could have a mixture of both puplic and private. I will explain...

Say people vote by PM and you count the posts. Midweek you could post a little hint of how well games are doing like this...

Total Suckage Week (please note this is not an actual suggestion for a theme )
1) B-Wings
2) Ghost Pilots
3) Darwin 4078
4) Funky Bee
5) S.S Mission

Notice that the amount of votes are not shown so B-Wings could be winning by a lot or not by much at all. This way sw still get to keep all the drama from the puplic voting system while still having some element of superise in the final outcome.

This is proberbly a poor idea since it might up your work load and not to mention the whole "to many PM's in my inbox" situation but it still might be worth considering.

[Icarus]

This method would also eliminate having to go through pages of a thread and potentially miss votes sandwiched between irrelevant posts. (Remembers a certain recount, recount, recount.)

The recount was the most entertaining part of the Cave Week voting period, it added a bit of suspense and a lot of comedy to a highly anticipated week, especially considering that the vote was a lot closer than it was in previous voting weeks. While I agree that moving to private eliminates the need for a recount and potential drama, STGT wouldn't be a social event if it wasn't for the comedy that occurs.

The other thing about public voting is that many can keep track of the vote. While I have no doubts about the honesty and integrity of the organisers, private voting may or may not work due to the fact that people might not believe that X game was really voted by the participating members, causing many possible disagreements. (Would you honestly believe that Star Force was the selected Retro Week game if it was put in a private vote?)

Public voting ensures that all voting results are visible and fair.

[Rob]

private voting may or may not work due to the fact that people might not believe that X game was really voted by the participating members, causing many possible disagreements. (Would you honestly believe that Star Force was the selected Retro Week game if it was put in a private vote?)

It would be very easy to list who voted for what after the voting is complete. PrtSc the inbox, one way.

I think the comedy of the voting thread is seriously overestimated. People will find other areas of the comp. to toss pics up. Voting is one thing that should just be efficient, honest, clear, etc. above anything else.

[Icarus]

It would be very easy to list who voted for what after the voting is complete. PrtSc the inbox, one way.

I think the comedy of the voting thread is seriously overestimated. People will find other areas of the comp. to toss pics up. Voting is one thing that should just be efficient, honest, clear, etc. above anything else.

You can shop a PrtScrn very easily.
Public votes are already efficient and visible, and more than one person can tally if the organisers are busy or something.

As for drama, well, drama follows everything and appears everywhere. You get more in the voting threads, though, due to complaints, snide remarks, "OMG withholding the team vote again??", last minute vote spamming and so on.

[Rob]

You can shop a PrtScrn very easily.

As for drama, well, drama follows everything and appears everywhere.

Oh drama! It can't be avoided. I think we can agree that someone who can't be trusted with keeping votes shouldn't be in charge of this. People can verify their vote by looking at the post-vote list.

and more than one person can tally if the organisers are busy or something.

The list of votes can be tossed in the thread just the same, letting people tally it and argue over the tally.

[DJ Incompetent]

Say people vote by PM and you count the posts. Midweek you could post a little hint of how well games are doing....

It'd defeat the point of private vote. When going private, people don't want any indication on how the vote is going so nobody can tweak strategies.



I thought captains compiling a vote list from all his team would be great. Then I realized we're going to have "100% voter turnout." Why? Because captains are going to make up votes for players who didn't reply to coordination requests. Then people who figure this out are going to complain that captains are using others to submit multiple votes for themselves. Theeeeen sombody's going to say full 7-man teams have a slightly unfair voting advantage because nobody can prove a captain's PM with 7 votes really was compiled from the wishes of 7 individual people.

Having a dedicated "STGT" account could work. Just count on the fact somebody who didn't get his way in the vote is going to point fingers or blame a process. You know this. Doesn't it happen to the top 25 threads like every year? A PrintScreen & listing who voted for what after the vote ends would be as good as it's gonna get.

Even during the voting period, there'll still be people having open conversations about who voted for what. People will be probing others trying to learn their voting habits to play the voting chess game anyway.

Private vote may be a more ideal process in a more closed technical non-social tourney, but as we're not really requiring massive waves of score proofs in score weeks, I'd say just go with Public voting. It is not perfect, but it's a far more stable process. It's best to just maintain check&balance controls and narrow down potential variables for (claims to) corruption when we're dealing with eighty people over the onlines.

[Rob]

Just count on the fact somebody who didn't get his way in the vote is going to point fingers or blame a process. You know this.

Whaaaaat? I got my way, I think! I felt lucky at the picks.

People will be probing others trying to learn their voting habits to play the voting chess game anyway.

That's fine.

as we're not really requiring massive waves of score proofs in score weeks, I'd say just go with Public voting.

I don't think these two things are related, but you can bet people want to see proof for the top scores. It wasn't exactly informal happy time.

[Danny]

Say people vote by PM and you count the posts. Midweek you could post a little hint of how well games are doing....

It'd defeat the point of private vote. When going private, people don't want any indication on how the vote is going so nobody can tweak strategies.

Sorry dude I typed that straight after returning from work. I'll be quite now...

[DJ Incompetent]

as we're not really requiring massive waves of score proofs in score weeks, I'd say just go with Public voting.

I don't think these two things are related, but you can bet people want to see proof for the top scores. It wasn't exactly informal happy time.

Yeah, but at face value it'd feel more like a super secure stingy secret vote when the point of the tourney, being the scores (under top 5), would feel much more laid back. Sorta inconsistent I guess.

Bad comparison? probably.




so far..

public support: 4 or 5
private support: 1

anybody new got a preference?

[Icarus]

I don't think these two things are related, but you can bet people want to see proof for the top scores.

The thing being that only two or three players provided proof/replays of their scores, without being asked, and yet there was a bit of controversy in the last week of the tournament regarding it. Whether or not that changes and more people both provide and request replays is left to the participants themselves.

(I will be providing replays for all my scores, as per usual.)

Anyway, I still vote for public voting, for reasons listed in previous posts. It makes for a more interesting tournament.

[Super Laydock]

so far..

public support: 4 or 5
private support: 1

anybody new got a preference?

Add another one for "public", for the reasons that Icarus listed.

[Rob]

public support: 4 or 5
private support: 1

Oh come on, I listed 4-5 good reasons. And then there's:

Public, pros:
+it's a trainwreck hehe
+informality??

Personally I just don't want to have to play the wait, watch and plot game vs. the let the top team(s) continually swing it their way game. Tedious, crap.

[Rob]

How about people who want to make their vote public can do that and people who want to make their vote private send them through PM? People could guess what they'd like from the public votes, but it wouldn't be the entire picture. That'd be a fair compromise.

[GaijinPunch]

yet there was a bit of controversy in the last week of the tournament regarding it.

Yeah... the internet is a pathetically sad place at times.

[Rob]

What was the controversy on Guwange week? I don't remember it.


And so my post doesn't get lost at the bottom of the last page:

How about people who want to make their vote public can do that and people who want to make their vote private send them through PM?

[GaijinPunch]

What was the controversy on Guwange week? I don't remember it.

I think it had to do w/ people scoring high, and a few tossers questioning their scores. I could be wrong though. Drama generally bounces off me. You should how often I blow off my wife.

[Rob]

Checked out the thread and remembered. Poor Shocky.

[DJ Incompetent]

How about people who want to make their vote public can do that and people who want to make their vote private send them through PM? People could guess what they'd like from the public votes, but it wouldn't be the entire picture. That'd be a fair compromise.

*shrugs* Why not.


So where we're at is we run public votes as we did in STGT '06 by posting in the thead. In-addition, users can choose to cast their vote via PM to username "STGT". Private and public votes will be revealed the way they always are at the end in the first post. I'll make a note to show proofs the private votes were actually cast.

Any objections?

[Pirate1019]

Sounds good to me.

[Icarus]

OBJECTION!!!

... naah, just kidding.

While I have my reservations about a combined voting system, the only way we can see if the benefits outweigh the downsides is to test it out. So yeah, go for it, if it doesn't work, it can always be shelved.

[Pirate1019]

if it doesn't work, it can always be shelved.

Isn't that how we're figuring out everything with STGT?

Trial and Error FTW.