This thread is here for any and all suggestions to the weekly contest. Rules discussion can now occur here. In addition you may suggest future contests and mediums as well as any voting issues or problems. Anything else relating to the conest may also be discussed here.
1. The art for this week's contest should not be animated.
2. I propose an amendment to the voting process. Now that we're getting 30+ votes on average for each week, I think that we need to amend our voting process - which was originally developed because hardly anyone was voting.
The system I propose would work like so:
a) Preliminary poll is posted night that the submissions are no longer valid. Users may vote for 3 submissions.
b) After the preliminary poll has been up for 4 days, close it, and put up a run-off with the half of the submissions in the preliminary poll with the most votes are the options. Make this "single vote" only, rather than multiple votes.
I feel this process will make the voting process a little less ambiguous and will yield more accurate results.
1. The art for this week's contest should not be animated.
I would say that is a pretty seperate issue that can be contained to the thread where discussion of it is already occuring.
2. I propose an amendment to the voting process. Now that we're getting 30+ votes on average for each week, I think that we need to amend our voting process - which was originally developed because hardly anyone was voting.
The system I propose would work like so:
a) Preliminary poll is posted night that the submissions are no longer valid. Users may vote for 3 submissions.
b) After the preliminary poll has been up for 4 days, close it, and put up a run-off with the half of the submissions in the preliminary poll with the most votes are the options. Make this "single vote" only, rather than multiple votes.
I feel this process will make the voting process a little less ambiguous and will yield more accurate results.
I also feel as though this is something that needs to be addressed. While the specifics I have in mind are a little different I hope others would be onboard with some kind of reform. I was thinking more along the lines of the top 1/3 of the first poll moving along as oppose to half. This is small difference though and if others would like 1/2 I am fine with that too.
2. I propose an amendment to the voting process. Now that we're getting 30+ votes on average for each week, I think that we need to amend our voting process - which was originally developed because hardly anyone was voting.
The system I propose would work like so:
a) Preliminary poll is posted night that the submissions are no longer valid. Users may vote for 3 submissions.
b) After the preliminary poll has been up for 4 days, close it, and put up a run-off with the half of the submissions in the preliminary poll with the most votes are the options. Make this "single vote" only, rather than multiple votes.
I feel this process will make the voting process a little less ambiguous and will yield more accurate results.
I don't think we even need the preliminary poll, I think just one poll where everyone gets one vote is what we need.
I don't think we even need the preliminary poll, I think just one poll where everyone gets one vote is what we need.
We tried that one week a while ago (I don't remember what number it was) and it was a disaster. The winner came out with something like 5 votes, and there were far less entries than an average week has now.
I like the idea of a preliminary poll with the top 1/2 - 1/3 moving on to a second poll. I think the best way to decide the number would be a somewhat flexable system where it is based on the number of entries. We probably want to draw the line somewhere (maybe 18+ gets the 1/3 treatment, 17- gets 1/2). Also, it should be announced at the beginning of each poll thread the exact number of people that will move on.
A last note, how will we deal with ties? Will we just allow 1 extra person to move on if there is a tie for the last spot? That would be my suggestion.
We tried that one week a while ago (I don't remember what number it was) and it was a disaster. The winner came out with something like 5 votes, and there were far less entries than an average week has now.
However, I'm sure there was a lot less activity in the contests than there is now, for example, so far this week, 37 people have voted. Also, I don't think less votes for each person is nessecarily a bad thing.
A last note, how will we deal with ties? Will we just allow 1 extra person to move on if there is a tie for the last spot? That would be my suggestion.
Yes, that is what I would. Allowing more people the oppurtunity is more important to me than elimanating more people.
As for the sliding scale you suggest that sounds good. Those exact numbers even sound good to me as final rounds with 6 to 8 is indeed what we are looking for.
However, I'm sure there was a lot less activity in the contests than there is now, for example, so far this week, 37 people have voted. Also, I don't think less votes for each person is nessecarily a bad thing.
I actually went and found the week (Week 40 if you're interested).
There were 13 entries (an extremely low number by current standards), and 33 people voted (a low, but not extremely low number by current standards). The winner had a whopping 6 votes. With that few votes it makes the choice much harder for a lot of people, and it also makes the race much closer. If there is one banner that is in everyones top 2-3, it should probably win. However, if everyone only gets 1 vote, it might not.
I think we're better off with the two-polls per week system proposed (and partially discussed) above. It allows for a reasonable voting system even when there are 20+ entries and 40 people voting (bad things would happen the other way with that).
Im fine with all the voting think once a month we should take the winners in that the month from each week and have them in their own contest
So for this month it would be the winner of week 52,52,54,55 and they would face off in a contest at the end of the month to see the winenr for the month
Im fine with all the voting think once a month we should take the winners in that the month from each week and have them in their own contest
So for this month it would be the winner of week 52,52,54,55 and they would face off in a contest at the end of the month to see the winenr for the month
Then the top twelve in a yearly. That was what I wanted to do with the DCC in custom cards when it used to be the DWM. Besides the clutter it would create I would support this idea as well.
Then the top twelve in a yearly. That was what I wanted to do with the DCC in custom cards when it used to be the DWM. Besides the clutter it would create I would support this idea as well.
I think it'd be cool to do this, however, when each weeks winner's face off for the month, theyh should have a seperate contest to be judged by rather than their winning entries as their entry for the month contest.
I think it'd be cool to do this, however, when each weeks winner's face off for the month, theyh should have a seperate contest to be judged by rather than their winning entries as their entry for the month contest.
Why?
AotM contestants don't write an extra article for the contest.
AotM contestants don't write an extra article for the contest.
AFAIK, people who write articles get to choose what they write about. This is not true for us banner and avatar makers. Therefore, our winning entry may not nessecarily be our best work, like it may be for articles writers. Therefore, it'd befairer for the people in contention for sig maker of the month to make a new banner following certain guidlines.
AFAIK, people who write articles get to choose what they write about. This is not true for us banner and avatar makers. Therefore, our winning entry may not nessecarily be our best work, like it may be for articles writers. Therefore, it'd befairer for the people in contention for sig maker of the month to make a new banner following certain guidlines.
How does the fact that writers choose their topic dictate the quality of their work?
It is almost entirely unrelated (noted exception: type 2 writers don't write about vintage, but then again, I don't think that applies for this... if you won a week, then it had to be at least half-decent).
How does the fact that writers choose their topic dictate the quality of their work?
I believe you miss the point he is making. He believes that because there are requirments set on the weekly contest that what is produced will not be as good as when they have open range.
I, however, do not think this is a good idea. We should let the entries which won their weekly stand on their own. Plus, we want to reward those win, not make them produce more.
I believe you miss the point he is making. He believes that because there are requirments set on the weekly contest that what is produced will not be as good as when they have open range.
I, however, do not think this is a good idea. We should let the entries which won their weekly stand on their own. Plus, we want to reward those win, not make them produce more.
I got the point... I just don't think it was a very valid one.
AFAIK, people who write articles get to choose what they write about. This is not true for us banner and avatar makers. Therefore, our winning entry may not nessecarily be our best work, like it may be for articles writers. Therefore, it'd befairer for the people in contention for sig maker of the month to make a new banner following certain guidlines.
Why not allow the Contestant to choose between one of their winning entries from the month in question or creating a new entry that follows any of the month's contest rules?
Then the contestants would have the option of choosing their winning entry (or between winning entries if they won twice in a month), or creating a new entry that followed any of the month's themes. For instance, in the above example, I'd be allowed to create a new entry that was a humorous animated multi-link banner. Or just a humorous multi-link banner... Or I could just use my Week 48 Entry as my Monthly Entry. Hopefully you get the idea.
Why allow Contestants to use their previous entries? Because not everyone who wins a weekly contest will have time to develop a monthy entry. I know that I'm not the only one with limited availability.
Why not force Contestants to use one of their winning entries from that month? As others have said before, it wouldn't be fair because that entry might not showcase the talents of the individual.
Also, if we implement the monthly portion of this contest then the winners should also receive one of those shiny coveted trophies.
This is based off what goes on at NSL [nationalsigleague.com].
It would be a MTGS Sig Battle League, where, in a new subforum, people could set up 1on1 banner and/or avatar battles, where on a certain theme/style the two contestants make the artwork and set up a voting thread. The person with the most votes after a few days is declared the winner and gets one point. A problem lies therein of the hassle of updating wins every so often, but I guess it could be managable.
An example set up could be:
Novice:
MTG - Banners featuring MTG art based off a certain theme presented by the contestants
Grunge - Grunge banners featuring brushes and no artwork based off a theme presented by the contestants
Other - banners featuring art and/or brushes based off a certain theme presented by the contestants [ for example, movies, games, music. NOT stock image models etc.]
Freestyle - banners of any theme presented by the contestants that do not fit into any of the other categories
Intermediate:
MTG
Grunge
Other
Freestyle
Pro:
MTG
Grunge
Other
Freestyle
Of course, avatar and banner contests would be stated in the title of the thread. The banners and avatars would of course follow MTGS guidelines.
The contestsants would be graded in a "Grading" Subforum, where they are graded by the Mods of the MTGSSL section... for example, myself, Topher, Spanglegluppet, and other well-known and experienced shoppers. Then they compete in that section and are able to be re-graded in a month.
This is based off what goes on at NSL [nationalsigleague.com].
It would be a MTGS Sig Battle League, where, in a new subforum, people could set up 1on1 banner and/or avatar battles, where on a certain theme/style the two contestants make the artwork and set up a voting thread. The person with the most votes after a few days is declared the winner and gets one point. A problem lies therein of the hassle of updating wins every so often, but I guess it could be managable.
An example set up could be:
Novice:
MTG - Banners featuring MTG art based off a certain theme presented by the contestants
Grunge - Grunge banners featuring brushes and no artwork based off a theme presented by the contestants
Other - banners featuring art and/or brushes based off a certain theme presented by the contestants [ for example, movies, games, music. NOT stock image models etc.]
Freestyle - banners of any theme presented by the contestants that do not fit into any of the other categories
Intermediate:
MTG
Grunge
Other
Freestyle
Pro:
MTG
Grunge
Other
Freestyle
Of course, avatar and banner contests would be stated in the title of the thread. The banners and avatars would of course follow MTGS guidelines.
The contestsants would be graded in a "Grading" Subforum, where they are graded by the Mods of the MTGSSL section... for example, myself, Topher, Spanglegluppet, and other well-known and experienced shoppers. Then they compete in that section and are able to be re-graded in a month.
"Hello! I've come to serenade you. I can't play guitar. I can't play this accordion either, but I thought it'd be less obvious."
Dylan Moran, Black Books
I agree that CharlieD's suggestion is really good.
Quote from "CharlieD" »
for example, myself, Topher, Spanglegluppet, and other well-known and experienced shoppers.
I believe this part should be done by a system of voting, not just chosen by a mod or whomever.
(I'm sure the named people will win - but it should still be polled)
Sig leagues are an awful idea. There is no organization 99% of the time, and someone ends up with tons of points because the battle tons of people, where as other people don't have that kind of idea.
I ran a site with a sig league, and it was a spamming nightmare. Most of the time there are obvious winners as well.
I agree that CharlieD's suggestion is really good.
I believe this part should be done by a system of voting, not just chosen by a mod or whomever.
(I'm sure the named people will win - but it should still be polled)
Well, you'd reckon the creator would be a mod, though, since he is the one that organized the whole thing. But I would set up a poll, and take applications etc.
@Keeper: Well, if one person gets alot of points, thats just how it goes. It wouldn't be a spamming nightmare because we'd keep it all in check.
And yeah, I meant it as a seperate contest, I didn't know where else to put it.
The threads are a nightmare. You need a rediculous amount of subforums, and then you have the.
"HEY GUYS THIS IS A THREAD ABOUT ME WANTING TO BATTLE"
"maybe."
"yeah, i'll battle."
"when?"
"idk, my rules, my court, due in 2 days."
"k"
"here's a post with my awesome sig"
"here's a post with my awful sig"
"here's 400 posts about why one sig pwns the other"
result: one person gains a point.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
2. I propose an amendment to the voting process. Now that we're getting 30+ votes on average for each week, I think that we need to amend our voting process - which was originally developed because hardly anyone was voting.
The system I propose would work like so:
a) Preliminary poll is posted night that the submissions are no longer valid. Users may vote for 3 submissions.
b) After the preliminary poll has been up for 4 days, close it, and put up a run-off with the half of the submissions in the preliminary poll with the most votes are the options. Make this "single vote" only, rather than multiple votes.
I feel this process will make the voting process a little less ambiguous and will yield more accurate results.
[KalmWave] [Last.FM]
Ubuntu Linux
I would say that is a pretty seperate issue that can be contained to the thread where discussion of it is already occuring.
I also feel as though this is something that needs to be addressed. While the specifics I have in mind are a little different I hope others would be onboard with some kind of reform. I was thinking more along the lines of the top 1/3 of the first poll moving along as oppose to half. This is small difference though and if others would like 1/2 I am fine with that too.
I don't think we even need the preliminary poll, I think just one poll where everyone gets one vote is what we need.
I like the idea of a preliminary poll with the top 1/2 - 1/3 moving on to a second poll. I think the best way to decide the number would be a somewhat flexable system where it is based on the number of entries. We probably want to draw the line somewhere (maybe 18+ gets the 1/3 treatment, 17- gets 1/2). Also, it should be announced at the beginning of each poll thread the exact number of people that will move on.
A last note, how will we deal with ties? Will we just allow 1 extra person to move on if there is a tie for the last spot? That would be my suggestion.
Winner of the Weekly Signature & Avatar Contest Weeks 51, 59, 78, & 118.
I don't care if I was framed for murder if I only got a warning I would let it go.
However, I'm sure there was a lot less activity in the contests than there is now, for example, so far this week, 37 people have voted. Also, I don't think less votes for each person is nessecarily a bad thing.
Yes, that is what I would. Allowing more people the oppurtunity is more important to me than elimanating more people.
As for the sliding scale you suggest that sounds good. Those exact numbers even sound good to me as final rounds with 6 to 8 is indeed what we are looking for.
There were 13 entries (an extremely low number by current standards), and 33 people voted (a low, but not extremely low number by current standards). The winner had a whopping 6 votes. With that few votes it makes the choice much harder for a lot of people, and it also makes the race much closer. If there is one banner that is in everyones top 2-3, it should probably win. However, if everyone only gets 1 vote, it might not.
I think we're better off with the two-polls per week system proposed (and partially discussed) above. It allows for a reasonable voting system even when there are 20+ entries and 40 people voting (bad things would happen the other way with that).
Winner of the Weekly Signature & Avatar Contest Weeks 51, 59, 78, & 118.
I don't care if I was framed for murder if I only got a warning I would let it go.
So for this month it would be the winner of week 52,52,54,55 and they would face off in a contest at the end of the month to see the winenr for the month
Then the top twelve in a yearly. That was what I wanted to do with the DCC in custom cards when it used to be the DWM. Besides the clutter it would create I would support this idea as well.
I think it'd be cool to do this, however, when each weeks winner's face off for the month, theyh should have a seperate contest to be judged by rather than their winning entries as their entry for the month contest.
Why?
AotM contestants don't write an extra article for the contest.
[KalmWave] [Last.FM]
Ubuntu Linux
AFAIK, people who write articles get to choose what they write about. This is not true for us banner and avatar makers. Therefore, our winning entry may not nessecarily be our best work, like it may be for articles writers. Therefore, it'd befairer for the people in contention for sig maker of the month to make a new banner following certain guidlines.
How does the fact that writers choose their topic dictate the quality of their work?
It is almost entirely unrelated (noted exception: type 2 writers don't write about vintage, but then again, I don't think that applies for this... if you won a week, then it had to be at least half-decent).
[KalmWave] [Last.FM]
Ubuntu Linux
I believe you miss the point he is making. He believes that because there are requirments set on the weekly contest that what is produced will not be as good as when they have open range.
I, however, do not think this is a good idea. We should let the entries which won their weekly stand on their own. Plus, we want to reward those win, not make them produce more.
I got the point... I just don't think it was a very valid one.
[KalmWave] [Last.FM]
Ubuntu Linux
Why not allow the Contestant to choose between one of their winning entries from the month in question or creating a new entry that follows any of the month's contest rules?
For Example, if our Month in question were:
Week 46 - Yusuke (1st Animated Week)
Week 47 - Craven (Multi-Link Week)
Week 48 - Topher (2nd Animated Week)
Week 49 - Flappy (Humour)
Then the contestants would have the option of choosing their winning entry (or between winning entries if they won twice in a month), or creating a new entry that followed any of the month's themes. For instance, in the above example, I'd be allowed to create a new entry that was a humorous animated multi-link banner. Or just a humorous multi-link banner... Or I could just use my Week 48 Entry as my Monthly Entry. Hopefully you get the idea.
Why allow Contestants to use their previous entries? Because not everyone who wins a weekly contest will have time to develop a monthy entry. I know that I'm not the only one with limited availability.
Why not force Contestants to use one of their winning entries from that month? As others have said before, it wouldn't be fair because that entry might not showcase the talents of the individual.
Also, if we implement the monthly portion of this contest then the winners should also receive one of those shiny coveted trophies.
The Weekly Avatar & Signature Contest needs Your Vote!
22|24|34|36|38|41|48|50|63|67|98|102|103|114
This is based off what goes on at NSL [nationalsigleague.com].
It would be a MTGS Sig Battle League, where, in a new subforum, people could set up 1on1 banner and/or avatar battles, where on a certain theme/style the two contestants make the artwork and set up a voting thread. The person with the most votes after a few days is declared the winner and gets one point. A problem lies therein of the hassle of updating wins every so often, but I guess it could be managable.
An example set up could be:
Novice:
MTG - Banners featuring MTG art based off a certain theme presented by the contestants
Grunge - Grunge banners featuring brushes and no artwork based off a theme presented by the contestants
Other - banners featuring art and/or brushes based off a certain theme presented by the contestants [ for example, movies, games, music. NOT stock image models etc.]
Freestyle - banners of any theme presented by the contestants that do not fit into any of the other categories
Intermediate:
MTG
Grunge
Other
Freestyle
Pro:
MTG
Grunge
Other
Freestyle
Of course, avatar and banner contests would be stated in the title of the thread. The banners and avatars would of course follow MTGS guidelines.
The contestsants would be graded in a "Grading" Subforum, where they are graded by the Mods of the MTGSSL section... for example, myself, Topher, Spanglegluppet, and other well-known and experienced shoppers. Then they compete in that section and are able to be re-graded in a month.
Sound like a decent proposal?
Sounds good. Shotgun mod
-Blurrycloud-
-Jester-
spanglegluppet dot com
"Hello! I've come to serenade you. I can't play guitar. I can't play this accordion either, but I thought it'd be less obvious."
Dylan Moran, Black Books
I believe this part should be done by a system of voting, not just chosen by a mod or whomever.
(I'm sure the named people will win - but it should still be polled)
I ran a site with a sig league, and it was a spamming nightmare. Most of the time there are obvious winners as well.
Well, you'd reckon the creator would be a mod, though, since he is the one that organized the whole thing. But I would set up a poll, and take applications etc.
@Keeper: Well, if one person gets alot of points, thats just how it goes. It wouldn't be a spamming nightmare because we'd keep it all in check.
And yeah, I meant it as a seperate contest, I didn't know where else to put it.
"HEY GUYS THIS IS A THREAD ABOUT ME WANTING TO BATTLE"
"maybe."
"yeah, i'll battle."
"when?"
"idk, my rules, my court, due in 2 days."
"k"
"here's a post with my awesome sig"
"here's a post with my awful sig"
"here's 400 posts about why one sig pwns the other"
result: one person gains a point.