In light of the recent complaints about low-quality posts getting high numbers of votes, I've thought of a solution that would not be affected by the growth that this site has experienced lately.

Instead of just doling out votes for posts, why don't we do it this way:

Vote 1 through 5 points on the execution, that is, realisticness, cleanness of selection, etc, where 1 point is abysmal, and 5 points is stellar quality. Or we could do 1 through 10 if we so desire.

And similarly vote 1 through 5 (or 10) on the concept, that is, originality, humor, etc.

The identity of the poster would not be revealed until after the contest has ended.

At the conclusion of the contest, the execution points would be averaged as well as the concept points. Each PSC member would have an execution average score, and a concept average score. For those who either flunked math or cut class,

average score = (sum of points received)/(number of members who critiqued the post)

e.g. for 200 execution votes rec'vd and 50 members who critiqued the post, that execution average score would then be 4.0 out of a possible 5 (or 10 if we decided to go with that maximum).

This system, I believe, would not be affected by what billtvshow referred to as "vote inflation", because instead of rating people based on the sum of points received, members are averaged. This statistic would constantly regulate itself over time, whereas just totalling votes does not.

Over time, the average score for each post would also be averaged, which would be called the member's execution average score per post (or something more brief) and the concept average score per post.

I would be interested in knowing what the other site members think of this idea. I've been a member for close to 3 years now (although I've come and gone over time) and seen this site undergo a number of changes. Based on the voting controversy, maybe this would be a good way to address it.

Sorry, too complicated. 2 scores per entry means voting takes even longer than it already does.

Good point. I guess the voting would have to occur over a limited time, or each member would have to be allowed a maximum number of posts to critique, or something like that.

BTW, it was you who came up with the term "inflation". I thought BTVS did, but he was quoting you instead.

I like this idea, but I think we should just have on voting scale.. 1-5 or 1-10, encompassing both execution and creativity. As people rate EVERY picture individually, the votes are averages for each picture and at the close of the contest, the one with the highest average is the winner.

This would eliminate voters giving away all of their votes before all pictures are submitted, because they would still have a change to rate the newer entries.

Does anyone else see a correlation between those who give frivolous
and copious amounts of votes out and the number of votes they recieve in return.
I think taking that "most votes given" stat of
the homepage would help quite a bit.
In other words I don't see people who don't vote heavily getting
heavy votes on said poor post.

Well I have not posted an imag for over 2weeks yet I still use all my votes. But dont get any in return, and I would like to think I get votes because of my work not my voting style.

BTW how do you get the little image at the bottom of the text box.

What lil' image, Bro?

Thanks Scion, I don't give more than 5 to 10 votes per contest. So that's why I don't get that manu votes

imo, posting anonymously would go a long way towards solving the voting problems on this site..thank you.

i like the idea of rating, but can someone (a competitor, by chance) come in and vote 1 or 0 to bring your rating DOWN enough to beat you. i dont like that at all. What if we delayed votingfor and hour, til 9 and let people post for an hour before voting starts. It wouldnt take away the advantage of having advantage, but give people time to do at least a little work before there is a 20 vote margin between the leader and my 'disadvantaged post' as good as it may be. I THINK ANONYMOUS POSTING WOULD HELP A TON AS WELL. PEOPLE TEND TO VOTE FOR THEIR FRIENDS, NOT FOR THE 'BEST'. ACTUALLY, PEOPLE TEND TO VOTE FOR SOLID, PROVEN CHOPPERS, EVEN WHEN THE CURRENT CHOP IS HALF ASSED.

I prefered the old anonymous entry during the contest. Seeing the nic of the user of entry definitely changes the point of fiew, makes it less neutral. When I started there was an poll about this topic, so I think that was the reason why they changed it. Maybe there are good reasons against it that I don't know.

Talking about voting-delay or advantage: I think that most of the members (both, advantage and non-advantage) would prefer, if any post has the same chance to get votes. So of cource a voting delay of one day (less would make no real sense) would raise the quality, quantity and the fun. If the difference between having 6 or 1 day time would generate enough advantage members to pay the bills: I would say "Yes, that's good" ...but I don't think so. I would lie, if I'd tell U that I would have done it myself. So if U say U would: think twice

When I have been on psc for the first time I was amazed about the non commercial spirit. PSC is a unique place in the internet and the "reason why" is that it don't has to follow rules of somone who pays for advertisment. So If the little unjustness of the advantage-system is the reason why psc is still the way it is - that's ok for me.

I don't have anything against the advantage system. The price is so low it would be silly to complain about. However, I would vote for anonymous posting. I believe it would create a more accurate vote response to the actual quality of the entry. Its all just for fun anyway. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. (except when I stay awake all night working on a chop.)

thats the point though, starved. You stay up all night working on a chop and get crapped on when it comes to voting, because people vote for their loyal voters. Or they vote for chops that are substandard just because of that persons talent. I think that people would be surprised how many votes people DONT get when they dont have thier name associated with it.

This topic has been addressed over and over on psc. The current system is in place and will stay that way. This place is more about communicating and learning from our peers that it is a strict competition site. We offered anonymous posting for a while. I would say that it was not a bad experiment, but the overall atmosphere of the site was rigid, sign ups were down and new users posted less. Enjoy the site!

~jmh

Hate to say I told ya so...