Announcement: 9th Annual Fractal Art Competition 2016

[3dickulus]

@quaz0r I second that motion, a #1 #2 and #3

[quaz0r]

i just loaded one of my entries out of curiosity and the rating thing isnt disabled so i guess you can vote for yourself, doh..      

[Sockratease]

i just loaded one of my entries out of curiosity and the rating thing isnt disabled so i guess you can vote for yourself, doh..    

It should show the option, but if you actually try to rate your own image it should display a message saying that is not allowed.

As I said, this gallery was not designed with competitions in mind, but I'm pretty sure it does not allow rating your own images  


EDIT:  Yup - I just tried rating the banner I made for the contest and saw the error.  Screenshot attached.

[quaz0r]

oh, thats good   

[cKleinhuis]

yes thats base functionality of the gallery as sock said it was not meant to host such an event, but has been used 9 times in a row by now

[1Bryan1]

i was actually just thinking the opposite, that anyone who submits an entry for a category should not vote in that category, as their self interest would bias their motivation for rating?  also the idea of giving every entry a rating seems like a not ideal approach?  lots of entries wouldnt really deserve less than a high rating, so if you were being honest you would probably end up giving similar high ratings to lots of entries.  given that most entries will probably be good, but the goal is still to select a winner or a couple of winners, it seems like maybe a better approach would be to have everyone select a #1, #2, #3, or something like that.

How about changing the rules for the next competition (I assume it is too late for current).
Use the star system to allow people to pick at the most 5 entries and rank them using stars (5 to 1)?
Then use a preferential voting system to identify the most liked entry.

[TheRedshiftRider]

How about changing the rules for the next competition (I assume it is too late for current).
Use the star system to allow people to pick at the most 5 entries and rank them using stars (5 to 1)?
Then use a preferential voting system to identify the most liked entry.

I don't know whether that would work since some people have already voted for entire sections. And I don't think every entry get an equal chance that way.

[Sockratease]

How about changing the rules for the next competition (I assume it is too late for current).
Use the star system to allow people to pick at the most 5 entries and rank them using stars (5 to 1)?
Then use a preferential voting system to identify the most liked entry.

As TheRedshiftRider said, that (like every system for voting in such contests) has drawbacks.

Main problem with that is the same as the problem with my favored alternate system of requiring a participant vote for every entry - namely; how to check it?

I like the idea of using a forum poll in some way.  But with hundreds of items, that can get messy.

Threads where people list their "Top Three" or "Top Five" entries also present the problem of not seeing the entries when rating.  And the bigger problem of tallying hundreds of replies made in text form as posts in a thread.

My point is that Every system has advantages and drawbacks.  All can be twisted by members who think they can influence the outcome via "strategic voting" or not voting.  Even (or especially?) the current system.

Ultimately, due to the sheer workload involved with nearly every other system, the in-gallery ratings will probably remain the system of choice regardless of any drawbacks it may entail.  

Unless we have any php wizards who can write a whole new plug-in for smf forums!  But then, to maintain veracity, it would have to be submitted to smf forums directly so people will know it has been vetted by the forum software makers as a secure system which can't be easily abused.

There is no easy answer and no perfect system.  

So...  Ummm...  Moo?

[Caleidoscope]

I don't know whether that would work since some people have already voted for entire sections. And I don't think every entry get an equal chance that way.

If you only vote for the 5 best entries there will be no use for most members  to participate. Lets be honest, some are so good that they usually stick out above all others with a length between them.  So why would other members participate?  By giving every entry at least one star the outcome is a list in which all participants are viewed and 'judged' You understand what I mean?  I fear that in the  only the top 5 ranking there will be few participants left.  But maybe I'm wrong

[TheRedshiftRider]

If you only vote for the 5 best entries there will be no use for most members  to participate. Lets be honest, some are so good that they usually stick out above all others with a length between them.  So why would other members participate?  By giving every entry at least one star the outcome is a list in which all participants are viewed and 'judged' You understand what I mean?  I fear that in the  only the top 5 ranking there will be few participants left.  But maybe I'm wrong

You are right, that was the kind of answer I was aiming for. 

[Sockratease]

If you only vote for the 5 best entries there will be no use for most members  to participate. Lets be honest, some are so good that they usually stick out above all others with a length between them.  So why would other members participate?  By giving every entry at least one star the outcome is a list in which all participants are viewed and 'judged' You understand what I mean?  I fear that in the  only the top 5 ranking there will be few participants left.  But maybe I'm wrong

I agree that would be best, but when I suggested we require all participants (let alone all people who want to "vote") rate every entry, there was a flurry of (largely legitimate) criticism.  The idea was very unpopular  

I guess people think of no vote as a "Zero Star" rating?

As it is, people are free to vote, or not vote, as they see fit.  Which, in the past, was the way the community seemed to want things.  Times change, and the member group fluctuates, so maybe someday we will have a new system, but honestly - I think we are stuck with this one right up until we finally upgrade the forum software all together!

But that is an entirely different, and frankly much bigger, problem...

[Caleidoscope]

Well Socrateas ao. To me I'm fine with the situation as it is and I vote as integer as I possibly can. And I give everybody at least one star because I honor each and everyone of them that they took the time, the effort and their creative skills to make themselves a piece of art for us to see and for them as a way of testing their own progress/creativity in a contest. 
I'm glad for example that it is great to see how many new members we got lately and with a lot of enthusiasm and some even participate in the competition, what i consider to be a Fractal party a feast of people with the same interest but still so very diverse.  Well, that is my 'humble' opinion   

[mclarekin]

After possibly a painstakingly thorough analysis of all voting data since the competition was first ran, I came across the alarming fact that the good images are consistently winners, that there is a definite bias in the voting system towards the good stuff.

Without even thinking seriously about it, I would strongly suggest the Less Ticking Method.

You mentally rate the images out of 5 stars but only enter the votes for 4 and 5 star images. So  the  contest becomes between the images deemed above average. This way I don’t find out that I am an even bigger loser than I thought, and can proudly consider myself as a "not above average" fractalist.

[Caleidoscope]

After possibly a painstakingly thorough analysis of all voting data since the competition was first ran, I came across the alarming fact that the good images are consistently winners, that there is a definite bias in the voting system towards the good stuff.

Without even thinking seriously about it, I would strongly suggest the Less Ticking Method.

You mentally rate the images out of 5 stars but only enter the votes for 4 and 5 star images. So  the  contest becomes between the images deemed above average. This way I don’t find out that I am an even bigger loser than I thought, and can proudly consider myself as a "not above average" fractalist.

I vote with all the 5 stars, so depending on how I like it I'll give either, one or two or three, four or five...!   Right?  Don't you?

[quaz0r]

im not interested in giving people bad ratings, so i just pick a handful of favorites and give them five stars and call it a day.  i imagine im not the only one who does it like that