+ Log in or register to post
Results 1 to 6 of 6
Thread: Forked Thread: Voting
Saturday, 16th August, 2008, 12:13 AM #1
Acolyte (Lvl 2)
Forked Thread: Voting
Forked from: If/how to impliment OOC points
Originally Posted by covaithe
My first though was "great idea" change votes...
...we already allow people to do that.
I've changed my vote.
We've always honored people's posts about changing their vote.
The current system has gotten us this far, it's simple and easy to understand.
Changing it now runs the risk of looking like we didn''t let people change votes before... which isn't true.
Plus making people type out their choices would probably depress turnout...
- EN World
- has no influence
- on adverts that
- are displayed by
- Google Adsense
Saturday, 16th August, 2008, 09:04 AM #2
Defender (Lvl 8)
We have tried to honor later posts expressing a change of opinion, yes, but if the automated vote count at the top of the thread is inaccurate, why have it? It's just misleading.
There are two kinds of votes that I have in mind, and I think different rules may be called for for each of them.
The first are specific proposals, such as proposing that a new player-created feat be added to the list of accepted content. Only judges vote on these. We don't have many of these now (which is good, because we don't have any judges, only facilitators), but once L4W gets going, the vast majority of votes will be this kind.
The second are votes on important issues that affect the whole community, such as which setting to use. Everyone can vote in these. Right now, we have a lot of them because we're still defining a lot of the fundamentals of the gaming world, but after L4W gets going in earnest, these will trickle down to very few, possibly none.
More later, real life obligations now.
Monday, 18th August, 2008, 07:24 AM #3
Acolyte (Lvl 2)
>We have tried to honor later posts expressing a change of
>opinion, yes, but if the automated vote count at the top of
>the thread is inaccurate, why have it? It's just misleading.
Because people usually get it right?
Because it's rare for votes to be off by only one or two?
----------> So it's not actually misleading.
Because it's a lot less work for us?
Because people can casually check and see what's going on (so it's more accessible)?
Because larger numbers of votes are easily seen at a glance?
Because we like representing complex things with simple pretty pictures?
Because we've used it so far and nobody's complained?
I'm not saying that we have to keep the current system, but it has benefits too.
Oh, and one more: Because changing it right now would be more work?
I agree with your assessment of the two types of votes.
Personally I'm inclined to say that once we start we can vote about voting and see if people want to take the second YES/NO system once those sorts of polls become common (i.e when we start playing).
Last edited by Graf; Monday, 18th August, 2008 at 07:35 AM.
Monday, 18th August, 2008, 08:48 AM #4
Defender (Lvl 8)
There's no work at all in changing. We simply say that it's different, and that's that.
It doesn't matter if it's rare for the poll count at the top to be off by only one or two; the fact that it's possible means that in order to know what the state of the poll is, you still have to read the whole thread and count manually.
And I disagree that people usually get it right and that the count is usually pretty accurate. I've "changed" my vote on every poll so far, though I'm pretty sure the change has failed to be counted at least once or twice. In both the ability score generation poll and the character races poll, the poll count showed a dead heat between two options. It was only on reading the thread and counting manually that a clear consensus emerged. And those are just the ones I remember clearly.
No, I'm starting to be pretty thoroughly convinced that ENWorld's polling mechanism is not suitable for our votes.
Wednesday, 20th August, 2008, 01:40 AM #5
Acolyte (Lvl 2)
If you were unhappy about previous poll results then you should have brought it up then...
The fact that you've suddenly seized on this point (and numerous others) when a vote has come up that you're personally against looks a bit ... it just doesn't look very good.
I think that, despite our position as facilitators, we need to accept that we don't "decide things" (unless it's absolutely impossible to structure a vote).
We facilitate the decision making process of the community, and if we get a result that we personally don't like? We suck it up.
I'm all for jawboning a poll (I did my damnest to talk people out of multiple characters at launch) but I -didn't-
1. Monkey with the poll
2. Arbitrarily change something
I realize your hearts in the right place, but it's a terrible precedent to set.
Why don't we get through the OOC points thing, and then if you still want to change you can write a proposal and we'll have a vote on your new system.
Wednesday, 20th August, 2008, 03:23 AM #6
Defender (Lvl 8)
This is a point that has occurred to me, yes. I'm not sure how best to handle it. Ooc points and voting rules are two of the main topics left to be decided before we can really kick this thing into gear. I feel pretty strongly that both are important topics to get right. The fact that we're running out of other things to finish working on for L4W's startup means, unfortunately, that they're being discussed at the same time. And, it so happens, my suggestions regarding voting rules might, if adopted, have an impact on the ooc points outcome. As it stands last time I looked in the OOC Points poll, there were three votes for awarding points to judges, and two people who voiced strong objections in comments. Which could be construed as three yes votes and two no votes, which, if I had my way PURELY ABOUT VOTING RULES and had never once opened my mouth about ooc points, would not pass.Originally Posted by Shawshank Redemption
As Andy Dufresne says, I find this decidedly inconvenient. It puts me in an awkward position. I've pushed as hard as I'm comfortable doing against ooc points in general and for judges in particular; everyone has heard what I have to say and will make up their minds as they see fit. Unless something new comes up, I'm done with the topic and I'll live with the outcome. But I'd really like the outcome to be clear and unambiguous, and not depend on whose interpretation of the poll results gets accepted. I'm desperately afraid that it won't be clear, and that I'll be faced with a choice between making a fuss that, as you say, wouldn't look very good, or swallowing my process objections along with my game-design reservations to preserve a semblance of unity, creating a terrible precedent.
So, yeah. There is a synergy, or conflict of interest if you prefer to call it that, between my positions on these two issues. What do you suggest that I do about it? I can't just keep quiet on the issue of voting rules; honestly that's far more important to me than ooc points. Nor can I really keep quiet on the subject of ooc points. I have opinions on the subject that I believe are justified by real concerns, and I would be doing less than my best for L4W's chances if I didn't do my best to express those opinions.
Bottom line: In addition to the many other things I want, such as total recall, the power of flight, no ooc points, more free time, and the phone number of that girl with the red hair that I knew in school, I also want voting results to be clear and decisive. Poll results require interpretation. So I think we shouldn't use polls.