[Suggestion] Aotw Judging (And other Contests)

[iNotorious]

I am in :Sparks:

:bdpf:

Thanks for the input on all three iNoto <3



Thank you xd



Thats the harsh truth for ya
True but we must do our best to minimize this.

Thank you all <3

No worries. I hope everything goes as planned ^^

 

[suki]

Thanks for your concerns Akash! : )

I have actually criticised albums for earlier contests, and that was just pms between pekoms and I, but I never got the chance to post them (and I did want to).

But if you guys like, I'm more than happy to officially make criticism for the aotw (same goes to other judges). ^^

 

[Pekoms]

Alright, I'll start by addressing each suggestion in chronological order. To start, AotW transitioned to a biweekly basis last year, as a result of diminished participation. I'm open to the idea of the judges commenting on each album, but the only things that would actually be changing is an obligation to comment and then publicly display them. Regardless of the contest, participants have always had the right to discuss their albums and receive constructive criticism after the given contest has concluded. Naturally, implementing the suggestion will slightly delay the turnaround for results, but that's unavoidable. Consider the first suggestion fully approved, with one caveat: if multiple participants request that comments pertaining to their submissions be private, the implementation will be revisited. Moving on to the second suggestion, I have no intention of opening the voting process up to everybody. That said, I am fine with making the AotW submissions anonymous, so as to potentially reduce supposed biases. The primary reason why I disprove of making the voting public is because it does absolutely nothing to diminish current concerns, assuming said concerns are genuine. From time to time, some members have derided the judges' decisions for supposedly being biased, but it'd be ludicrous to write that off as something inapplicable to the normal users. Neither the host nor the judges have any tangible 'gains' from being biased/corrupt. On the other hand, the normal users are the ones vying for medals and the cyan user-group. Even if it boils down to optimism regarding normal user trustworthiness, other contests with public voting have had issues in the past with the public voting. It doesn't happen frequently (to our knowledge), but people have been disqualified or stripped of medals due to messages urging others to vote for their entries. Moreover, it's not like there aren't a few routes to take when fishing for votes: VMs, PMs, NB groups, and Skype. I personally don't believe the staff are above scrutiny, but there is certainly at least one ramification for dishonest moderators getting caught - loss of their staff position. It may seem to be an insignificant or unreliable deterrent, but nonetheless, it is a deterrent that is nonexistent for normal users. Consider the second suggestion partially approved, insofar as submissions will be made anonymous to all judges bar the host. Lastly, the third suggestion; it's the only one I'm having trouble assigning an adjective to. Based off of what I know, AotW has always allowed medals for 1st - 3rd place, with 1st place also receiving one month in the cyan user-group. A rule maintained by prior hosts, however, was not issuing medals for 3rd place if a minimum of ten entries was not met. The aforementioned rule is no longer in effect and for several months winners have also been granted a one-time username change. Even much more recently, periodical incentives have been added [

You must be registered for see links

and

You must be registered for see links

]. Though ideas were not present in the original post, in terms of completely novel incentives, the explicit approval of Zise would be required. Consider the third suggestion 'on hold' and my personal stance - neutral. Just as these suggestions have been made, additional, more specific ones regarding incentives can be made at any time. The sole caveat is that implementing proposed incentives is at the discretion of Zise. Everybody is free to continue posting, for the time being; that's about it for now.​

 

[Akаsh]

Thanks for your concerns Akash! : )

I have actually criticised albums for earlier contests, and that was just pms between pekoms and I, but I never got the chance to post them (and I did want to).

But if you guys like, I'm more than happy to officially make criticism for the aotw (same goes to other judges). ^^

Thats awesome Nefer! ~ <3
I'm glad you're supportive of it

Alright, I'll start by addressing each suggestion in chronological order. To start, AotW transitioned to a biweekly basis last year, as a result of diminished participation. I'm open to the idea of the judges commenting on each album, but the only things that would actually be changing is an obligation to comment and then publicly display them. Regardless of the contest, participants have always had the right to discuss their albums and receive constructive criticism after the given contest has concluded. Naturally, implementing the suggestion will slightly delay the turnaround for results, but that's unavoidable. Consider the first suggestion fully approved, with one caveat: if multiple participants request that comments pertaining to their submissions be private, the implementation will be revisited. Moving on to the second suggestion, I have no intention of opening the voting process up to everybody. That said, I am fine with making the AotW submissions anonymous, so as to potentially reduce supposed biases. The primary reason why I disprove of making the voting public is because it does absolutely nothing to diminish current concerns, assuming said concerns are genuine. From time to time, some members have derided the judges' decisions for supposedly being biased, but it'd be ludicrous to write that off as something inapplicable to the normal users. Neither the host nor the judges have any tangible 'gains' from being biased/corrupt. On the other hand, the normal users are the ones vying for medals and the cyan user-group. Even if it boils down to optimism regarding normal user trustworthiness, other contests with public voting have had issues in the past with the public voting. It doesn't happen frequently (to our knowledge), but people have been disqualified or stripped of medals due to messages urging others to vote for their entries. Moreover, it's not like there aren't a few routes to take when fishing for votes: VMs, PMs, NB groups, and Skype. I personally don't believe the staff are above scrutiny, but there is certainly at least one ramification for dishonest moderators getting caught - loss of their staff position. It may seem to be an insignificant or unreliable deterrent, but nonetheless, it is a deterrent that is nonexistent for normal users. Consider the second suggestion partially approved, insofar as submissions will be made anonymous to all judges bar the host. Lastly, the third suggestion; it's the only one I'm having trouble assigning an adjective to. Based off of what I know, AotW has always allowed medals for 1st - 3rd place, with 1st place also receiving one month in the cyan user-group. A rule maintained by prior hosts, however, was not issuing medals for 3rd place if a minimum of ten entries was not met. The aforementioned rule is no longer in effect and for several months winners have also been granted a one-time username change. Even much more recently, periodical incentives have been added [

You must be registered for see links

and

You must be registered for see links

]. Though ideas were not present in the original post, in terms of completely novel incentives, the explicit approval of Zise would be required. Consider the third suggestion 'on hold' and my personal stance - neutral. Just as these suggestions have been made, additional, more specific ones regarding incentives can be made at any time. The sole caveat is that implementing proposed incentives is at the discretion of Zise. Everybody is free to continue posting, for the time being; that's about it for now.​

Everything you mentioned was completely understandable
It means allot for providing your opinion on this as well as accepting to these suggestions. I hope all goes well

Thank you guys, if anyone else has anything else to say, you're still welcome to do so :bouncy:
I'd like to know the admins' opinion on this too, when they're not busy

 

[Bimbonium]

I think Suggestion 2 is the best, making the contests voting based is the most fair option.

I would like to say is that some of the NB contests are too High Level for people to participate, the biggest one being Profile of the Month Contest where a Newbie can never hope to win. I mean Newbies do make good profiles, but the Pro Participants are too ridiculously good and there is no way to match them (Which is why I stopped participating in that contest).

I think we should have contests where everyone can participate regardless of their skill levels. Some of the Contests in this category are Fill Up The Bubble, Hidden Phrase and Treasure Hunt. You don't need High Tier GFX Skills for this, anybody can participate and have an equal chance to win. As far as I think, these three are the only NB Contests which have a lot of Potential. Another Contest Idea that I held was the Mafia Game Death Note Contest (The next one is in April and it will be hopefully more successful than the first one I hosted). This contest also has a lot of potential if it does become Official Permanently.

Basically what I want to say is make contests where everyone can win easily, and not do loads of effort just to win one. Cause if you have contests where people have to do loads of effort to win one, no one will bother to participate.

This kinda sums it up, it's the principal reason I only participate in contests that don't require a definite skill set, though the other reason (which I'm sure is not a personal one) is the fact that some contests require too much effort, which might mean I'm lazy but it's the truth, the effort required for some contests makes newbies shy away from it