| BWMN Time |
| 10/14/2024 |
| 17:44 |
| News |
| new account |
| list users |
| Login: |
| Replays |
| Map DB |
| ICCup |
| Map Access |
| New map |
| Edit map |
 |
Forum - main
Rules Needed page: 1 2 3 | ||
| I think the administrators here should come up with a set of clear rules as to how the voting is to proceed and who can vote. Just by votes alone Endorphine should win the next MOTM. The posters "Cucdas", "For2Motion", "Control", "herb", "potential" and "TSL" voted this map as their first option. Why shouldn't their votes be counted? "Cucdas" has contributed 3 maps to this databas, and "For2Motion" and "herb" one each. "Control", "potential" and "TSL" have not contributed any maps, but is that going to be the criteria? To vote you need to have posted some maps? I didn't like the map or the author's bland replies in the map thread but is that going to be the criteria? To be able to vote you need to post maps and write articulate replies to criticism? Or to vote you need make helpful suggestions about other people's maps? What if your command of English is not that good? Also with regards to this map; "Arden", "DeSade" and "DG)SpoilR" thought this map was good enough to consider it their 2nd, 2nd and 3rd option respectively. Finally, with regards to the votes of "Cucdas", "For2Motion", "Control", "herb", "potential" and "TSL", remember that they also had 2nd and 3rd choices. Will those choices be invalidated too? How will this affect the second and third place maps? Or do we only care about the first place? How do we decide whose votes get invalidated? I don't claim to have the answers to these questions but to avoid the charge that this web-site is run by a corrupt clique that will censure votes when they consider then to go against what THEY think is right you need to come up with some dicerning criteria soon. | ||
| 2007, 05, 05 01:32 | ||
| I haven't seen accounts for control, potential, or tsl on mapdori, so I'm not counting their votes at all. I'm pretty sure herb, for2motion, and cucdas are all mapdori mappers, but they are not at all active here. They are part of the grig crew, one of them shows up and submits a grig map, then all of a sudden they all appear and vote for his map. Only reason they vote for other maps is because they have to vote for atleast 2. I'm open to all nongrigcrew opinions, even Grief's, although I already know what he'll say. I didn't see anyone but Grief question the vote of the Golden, and I didn't either because he voted my map =/ But people like the Golden who show up once, upload a map, vote, and disapear, cucdas and herb and for2motion did this too, as do many of the voters, I don't think their votes should be counted. As far as I'm concerned, the vote of a seasoned mapper is far more significant than that of a one time poster, or someone who uploads a map then leaves. Salazar is a good mapper, but he never says anything, never edits his maps, but he votes. I would like to consider his vote equally because he is a good mapper, but he doesn't contribute to bwm except through adding his maps. Someone like lnept or scout I will consider their votes strongly because they are both competent players, and have been here even longer than I have. Nasty, Arden, and Flo for example have been here forever it seems, their votes are important. Lancet or the other newer but active mappers' votes I will consider, but not necessarily weigh the same as someone like Nasty persay. This isn't an absolute democracy, it never was intended to be. When MOTW was first run, only the admins voted, and they were longtime mappers who were very experienced in mapping. Things changed when everyone else started voting, then grig and his crew showed up and spammed the votes, making up names like "boymeetsrapist" and voting with them. I'm not considering that trash at all. More feedback please, and Grief, you don't have to tell everyone what a tyrant you think I am, you've made that clear already. | ||
| 2007, 05, 05 06:30 | ||
| i suggest some requirement for non-admin votes: - minimum of 5 maps uploaded - 2 replays uploaded on the 1st voted map - 1 replay uploaded on the other 2nd and 3rd - senseful comments that prove the worthiness of the map and prove its superiority against the other candidates (that cant be counted of course) | ||
| 2007, 05, 05 10:57 | ||
| all this discussion is unnecessary when you consider that with our low member count (regarding the mass of maps we have here in every competition), fakevoting is very easy and effective as hell. basically, you could with around 8 people throw the whole competition, even if all other sitemembers would vote all one other map. just keep any reasonable argument about freedom of speech, democracy and equality out of your mind, and only think of this fact: fakevoting screws the whole decision process because if you count every site-foreign vote, there'll be no true and wise decision, but only corruption of votes. random people cant have the same heavyness of votes as proven skilled and experienced mappers. | ||
| 2007, 05, 05 12:25 | ||
| "- minimum of 5 maps uploaded" I'm against this. You could always upload crap, but some people might be good judges but don't map. Think of gamers etc. Votes of people who actually played the maps they vote for and prove this with replays certainly should be considered. That's what we actually want: People testing the maps beforehand. Of course the replays should be checked out, but I guess that's clear anyways. | ||
| 2007, 05, 05 13:30 | ||
| "Lancet or the other newer but active mappers' votes I will consider, but not necessarily weigh the same as someone like Nasty persay." Oh dear, poor lowly scum of a low life me, woe, woe ,woe. I will change my name to "1/3 Nastymarine" or is it "1/8 Nastimarine"? "This isn't an absolute democracy, it never was intended to be." Hey, even in the U.S. constitution it says (and I quote): Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other persons". "3/5 Nastymarine"? | ||
| 2007, 05, 05 19:22 | ||
| Don't worry, Lancet, in reality he will consider your votes just the same as Nasty's - he'll rule out both ;) | ||
| 2007, 05, 05 19:27 | ||
| lancet, this is NO democracy. no forum is like democracy, because admins dont get elected. this is nothing that would work on a community as small as this. so YES, we dont count votes from random newbies in mapmaking and/or playing bw. | ||
| 2007, 05, 05 19:40 | ||
| haha lancet don't take it personally, when I say the newer active mappers' votes to be considered with less weight than say nasty's, I'm pretty much just talking about if we have a tie or something. And I'm not measuring people in fractions nasty :) I think that for the mostpart, there isn't a reason to put specifics on the vote, but someone who's not at all active I will disregard entirely and ignore all three of his votes, someone who's active here, I will count. If someone makes intelligent or reasonable sounding comments, they don't have to have a single map uploaded; but if they sound like they don't know how to play sc, or know balance in maps at all, I really don't care what they vote for. | ||
| 2007, 05, 05 21:10 | ||
| i think the new voting system have aggravate the situation additional to the fake voters issue.a lack of overview. the fake voters situation is always discussed when a map win the vote and the admins not agree with. but i admit the fake voters situation is a issue against we have to proceed. but i plead to return to the old voting system too.why? because even if we exclude the fake votes in this process,it's possible with my second/third vote to support my pals map.this is something we should avoid also. i have in mind a solution to deal with this.we have a user list,right?we can start by making a members list.all the known people arround should be part of this list.with members i dont mean admins.all those members votes shouldnt be in the future ever contested,just in the case a member resign freely to his members status. evry new user who wanna vote in the future maps here need five active members that bail for him.and because the members are not fake members it would be very hard for a fake user to become a fake member. | ||
| 2007, 05, 05 22:27 | ||
| Well, we know the active people around here. It's not like there were 100+ active people on this page. And how about this: Let's simply not abuse the voting system. We will only count the votes of people we consider "worthy" (lacking a good word for it :p), and those people should be mature enough not to abuse the system. Deal? | ||
| 2007, 05, 05 22:54 | ||
| if there's not so much around i dont understand your reservation.cause one is clear.this discussion will return sooner or later.i would say everytime when a obnoxious,by admins map will win again.let us make rules for everyone and finish with this theme once for all. or you simple like this fight again and again? | ||
| 2007, 05, 05 23:07 | ||
| There will be problems with those rules as well; also they create lots of bureocracy (Did I spell it correctly?). And about this "fight": We admins have the power. And basically, since he is working the most for the site, Nightmarjoo has the power. It is a lot simpler to sort out votes from people whose names you have never heard before than any other rules. And if someone has problems with an admin's decision, we will have to discuss THAT. Not the voting rights. Of course this reglementation requires everyone to trust in the admins and especially Nightmarjoo, and for both sides the will and ability to discuss differences in a civilized manner. I hope I made myself clear, probably a little hard to get what I mean :p | ||
| 2007, 05, 05 23:19 | ||
| remaining to the actuall status-quo leads to intransparency in decisions,doesnt solve the problem in any way,and the entire bureaucracy work is alot more intense.you need to sort the votes,you have to decide if they are not fakes and endless discussion about the decision. the way that i suggest is to put in a members list all the known people around and those votes decide in the contests.what so hard about? and as a user if you wanna become a member with voting rights you need 5 active members that support your request. what is so complicated here? modified by Grief_Stricken | ||
| 2007, 05, 05 23:33 | ||
| well I don't think the list is necessary for one; secondly, I can't add things like that to the site, we'd have to have it in a forum thread, which would get pushed off the list, and then in bumping it would push another thread off the list. Also, what if someone active doesn't get the 5 active member support? Many people don't like for example lnept for whatever reason, he's been here longer than many of us here, is a competent gamer and understands sc, and is an active member. It would be a stupid list if it excluded people like that. bureaucracy | ||
| 2007, 05, 06 01:17 | ||
| Well, ok, I am not against it. I don't think it's necessary, though. If the others agree with it, we can do it. The list would probably situated best in the articles section, since it isn't pushed off the list there. We would also need a thread in one of the forums where we can discuss who to take in the list (that is, where the 5 members can post their agreement). The "5 members agree" rule shouldn't be executed THAT strictly, though. Especially for the people that already have a good reputation we wouldn't go through the process of collecting 5 votes. Admins would be in the list instantly, of course. In special circumstances (which I can't think of any), an Admin would always be able to accept/deny a person. If we applied that rule exactly as you said, we couldn't get a single "member" at the beginning, btw :p There are no 5 "members" who could vote for someone ^^ Since there is no "member" status in the script of this website (panschk would have to do some coding), everyone will still be able to vote. If someone votes that is actually a good mapper, but for some reason not in the list yet, his vote counts and he should be listed asap, of course. So, I tried to cover every aspect. Anything wrong, Grief? | ||
| 2007, 05, 06 01:21 | ||
| the current system is not fixed and quite free, yeah. but this helps a lot keeping bad influences off this page. because when there are no rules, we can act how the situation requires it. rules and reglements in a small society always help those who try to find a way to abuse or bend them. | ||
| 2007, 05, 06 01:21 | ||
| Damn, I can't edit articles. Nightmarjoo, can you edit them? | ||
| 2007, 05, 06 01:24 | ||
| Well I can say I agree with everyones posts. From Lancet's to Grief's you all have points. But we really cant implement anything into the sight like a list or w.e. - thats all panschk's rights etc. So thats why we are kinda forced to make decisions on our own as admins. It looks unprofessional but we've never been that organized when deciding on motws anyway. and that is with all the vote systems we've ever had. I can say though, that when we didn't have any poll voting we were all supposed to put down our votes with our opinions which showed our arguements and opinions about each map which lead to good judging.. and we hardly get any of that anymore. now all we seem to do is get into arguments about how stupid each other are. but honestly I think we are fine on how we handle it in general. grig and his friends or smurfs only come around once every few weeks and then go away. We don't see much input or activity from them and thats the reason why we keep them out of MOTM and MOTY and MOTW. If we, admins, see them participate more then we'd accept their opinions. modified by NastyMarine | ||
| 2007, 05, 06 02:00 | ||
| Yeah I can edit/create articles spines. But I agree with flo. Nasty's account is correct also. I don't think the list is necessary at all, no need for actual rules imo. Just sorta worry about it when we get there; I explained my feelings on when/who to ignore. | ||
| 2007, 05, 06 04:30 | ||
| @spinesheat in one point you havent understand me right.the same aims for nightmarjoo.i said - we put all the known people in that list.when we start we add automatic this people,about we surely know they are not fakes.like inept,tampon,scout,salazar,myself all admins... after this,in a second phase we start to apply the rule that i suggest.a 5 members support as requirement for a membership. modified by Grief_Stricken | ||
| 2007, 05, 08 18:33 | ||
| page: 1 2 3 | ||
Reply:
You have to be logged in to post
 |