One-Synth-Challenge 60: Any One Synth - Submissions, Voting & Results

[RichardSemper]

I mocked up a quick wire frame of a half baked solution I thought of after voting on the current revision. I think other people may have been suggesting something like this too. Helps me to visualize things.

Way it would work is everything starts in the 1 point column. As you vote, you drag tracks to a different column as desired.

There could be quota limits for the number of slots available in each column based on the total # of entries.

Another thought is that instead of points, they are just tiers and stacking them in each tier determines the ranking.

with slight changes - points (columns) from 1 to 7 (at least) and there should be min and max limits for each column - maybe min=((total # of entries)/2)/(# of columns) , max=((total # of entries)*2)/(# of columns). The column heading could be red until the criterion is not satisfied.

+1 to this. If doable would be very intuitive, and address the issues of fairness.

[ClaRago]

The voting interface is fabulous , the new voting system i.e. stacking up tracks in order of preference SUCKS.
I really appreciated the 5 points system ( Love, Like a lot, Like , So-so, Don’t like or if you prefer Excellent, Very good , Good, Honest, Not my cup of tea) which is much more akin to my mode of judging most things including food.
It also gave me the opportunity to give points ( sometimes 5 ) to some tracks in genres I do not necessarily appreciate but had some interesting twists or sounds and/or original creative bits . There are plenty this month and I do not know whether I am going to rate track A better than B and no idea what to do with track C , however they all deserve 3 points . This change is turning an enjoyable experience where I was listening to all the submitted tracks , reading other people’s comments on Soundcloud and making my own into an arduous unpleasant administrative task.
I am also convinced that absolute judgement ( giving points) is much more reliable than its relative counterpart ( comparing items) , even more so as the number or items ( OSC submitted tracks here) increases .

BTW how many people took part in the voting for the new voting system ?

[animehaus]

BTW how many people took part in the voting for the new voting system ?

18 people.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1bhf9T0 ... wanalytics

[ClaRago]

18 people !!!
There must be a way to involve a bit more participants ( including myself ) into that process : pm of a voting form to the participants of the 5 previous OSCs or some obligation to vote for the voting process as you produce your entry or enter your OSC vote. Any idea ?

[chilledpanda]

18 people !!!
There must be a way to involve a bit more participants ( including myself ) into that process : pm of a voting form to the participants of the 5 previous OSCs or some obligation to vote for the voting process as you produce your entry or enter your OSC vote. Any idea ?

Well I guess it's a bit like voting polls, people can't be bothered to turn out to vote, but quite happy to moan about the decision .

For me I voted because I didn't like the fact anyone could vote that many 1s and few above. I can't tell whether it was tactical voting, couldn't be bothered or simply their way of voting(which I'm guessing it is). Just it skews the previous voting too much.
A standard is ideal, e.g. while it is points is behind it, I think a standard terminology would be better, with points too much can be read into it. Everyone does it different.
TBH I did find myself comparing with the old points system anyway, so stacking won't be such a bind. Think I need to think in terminology and make my life easier

[ClaRago]

It is not at all like the voting polls when one is over exposed to the candidates policies . My feeling is that this is rather the other way round in this case , maybe the 18 voters spend a lot of time roaming through the kvr forums and are fully aware of what is going on all the time. I am not sure it the case for all the contestants.

[ThePresent]

Voted and still listening. And again, while truly appreciating the efforts and ease of operation (a definite keeper!) , ... please change the system of comparision.

[chilledpanda]

It is not at all like the voting polls when one is over exposed to the candidates policies . My feeling is that this is rather the other way round in this case , maybe the 18 voters spend a lot of time roaming through the kvr forums and are fully aware of what is going on all the time. I am not sure it the case for all the contestants.

Ah well to me the only difference to me is I ignore the political bs of high place power hungry criminals in the political system (but I digress) , but do visit the the OSC fun place fairly regularly to keep in the loop

Actually I became aware of it via on the one of the OSC threads, think it was a posting by v'ger in one of the precious chat ones. I guess since their isn't an "officially registered" list of participants, it would be hard for them to notify everyone.
Maybe their should be for important announcements?

[bjporter]

It is not at all like the voting polls when one is over exposed to the candidates policies . My feeling is that this is rather the other way round in this case , maybe the 18 voters spend a lot of time roaming through the kvr forums and are fully aware of what is going on all the time. I am not sure it the case for all the contestants.

Ah well to me the only difference to me is I ignore the political bs of high place power hungry criminals in the political system (but I digress) , but do visit the the OSC fun place fairly regularly to keep in the loop

Actually I became aware of it via on the one of the OSC threads, think it was a posting by v'ger in one of the precious chat ones. I guess since their isn't an "officially registered" list of participants, it would be hard for them to notify everyone.
Maybe their should be for important announcements?

We'll have an email list set up. I already got the account at Mail Chimp. I think email is probably still the best way right? Of course it has a one click unsubscribe.

[idfpower]

VOTED...

[V'ger]

It seems from the discussion here and also the OSC voting history that maybe the tough part of voting is the comparison voting / ranking?

In the early competitions, you had to write out your top 7 in order but people found it so tough we went down to top 5.

Still there were a lot of posts people saying just ranking top 5 was hard as hell, and also maybe slightly unfair in that several tracks could be equally good, so we got the system where all tracks get points from 1-5.

That was the system until this new stacking one now, and I do believe there was never much complaining it was too hard even if you had to score ALL tracks, it was probably more complaints when it was to rank the top 5 only, so it seems in conclusion that it is the comparison that is the tough part of voting. So comparing/ranking 68 now would be the hardest vote ever..

[chilledpanda]

It seems from the discussion here and also the OSC voting history that maybe the tough part of voting is the comparison voting / ranking?

In the early competitions, you had to write out your top 7 in order but people found it so tough we went down to top 5.

Still there were a lot of posts people saying just ranking top 5 was hard as hell, and also maybe slightly unfair in that several tracks could be equally good, so we got the system where all tracks get points from 1-5.

That was the system until this new stacking one now, and I do believe there was never much complaining it was too hard even if you had to score ALL tracks, it was probably more complaints when it was to rank the top 5 only, so it seems in conclusion that it is the comparison that is the tough part of voting. So comparing/ranking 68 now would be the hardest vote ever..

,

Not for me, I compared the cm special and that had more participants

Maybe the 1..5 should have a minimum point entry, say the mean or median of the last ( or last few) osc votes as the bare minimum aggregated point-age divide that by number participants in that/those osc votes, you then have a multiplier that can be applied to the number of participants in each comp, so multiplier x number participants = minimum points needed, I'd be happy with that.
May sound complex but it isn't for the end users. It's a simple as using the jasinski™ mock you can drag n drop to the 1..5 columns and a current total with minimum points needed in this vote is displayed rather than minimum per column, it would be a doddle to use and flexible enough to distribute pointage, but not allow the very low scoring. The simple maths is all done behind the scenes. And you can submit your vote once the minimum is achieved.

Although I still like the category, gives us lesser mortals something to aim for .

[chilledpanda]

It is not at all like the voting polls when one is over exposed to the candidates policies . My feeling is that this is rather the other way round in this case , maybe the 18 voters spend a lot of time roaming through the kvr forums and are fully aware of what is going on all the time. I am not sure it the case for all the contestants.

Ah well to me the only difference to me is I ignore the political bs of high place power hungry criminals in the political system (but I digress) , but do visit the the OSC fun place fairly regularly to keep in the loop

Actually I became aware of it via on the one of the OSC threads, think it was a posting by v'ger in one of the precious chat ones. I guess since their isn't an "officially registered" list of participants, it would be hard for them to notify everyone.
Maybe their should be for important announcements?

We'll have an email list set up. I already got the account at Mail Chimp. I think email is probably still the best way right? Of course it has a one click unsubscribe.

Sounds good to me. So if you unsubscribe then that's you own fault if you miss something important. Might be good to post a link in each OSC comp so newbies know.

[Breeze]

I don't mean to raise a ruckus about this; I just have an innocent question about submission length for which there must surely be some history I'm not aware of: why is it that there's no time limit on a submission?

[bjporter]

I don't mean to raise a ruckus about this; I just have an innocent question about submission length for which there must surely be some history I'm not aware of: why is it that there's no time limit on a submission?

I'm not a aware of any