Voters are influenced?

[Diek]

I wasn't suggesting I take on role of policeman. I did say I was willing to be "honest" after all! (Nothing personal to our fine officers...)

No, sorry. I was not pointing to you, You but in general.

I'm not against hiding our names more as a game, but my thinking is like somebody would carry more work than needed.

[Wopelka]

the interest of an anonymous contest is not linked with doubts about honesty. it would be just for fun.

you know, the wrapping paper, the pleasure of guessing and expectation.

[freeztar]

Here,Here George!!



BTW, I looked up your location by GPS a while back and it landed in the middle of Iraq!! I thought you were trying to make some kinda statement.

[You™]

...I looked up your location by GPS a while back and it landed in the middle of Iraq!! I thought you were trying to make some kinda statement.

I'm not that clever.

Another thread successfully steered off topic.

[AndreasE]

anyone could easily discover my true name if they so desired. They could simply ask.

You, who are you if you are not You?

[pHz]

yeah george ... what IS your name ???

slainte rob

[You™]

I've heard that to truly own something, you must first know it's name. But you'll just have to figure it out on your own - unless by divulging more personal info, you all will vote for me.

[jens]

would be nigh impossible [...]

scared?

I'm all for an anonymous month - I would gladly help to host at least some of the files...

[JerGoertz]

If we are all so honest, and have the ideas so clear, what are we talking about?
I think everyone must be responsible by him/herself.
If we have to "police" or hide the names, it means something it's wrong.
Cheers!

Yes, actually, looking at the results of the poll: There is obviously no need for an anonymous contest ...

Regards,

Tommy

Unless you realize that a poll like this doesn't necessarily mean anything about people's actual (sometimes subconscious) attitudes. Who is going to want to come out and say, "Yes, I let myself be influenced by personality"? Yet studies have shown this happens.

We don't know HOW MUCH of an issue it is here, and I'm not going to continue to flog this dead horse b/c we probably never will know... I would support at least an experimental anonymous competition, if that can work at all...

[JerGoertz]

JerGoertz quoth

But I wasn't sure what you meant by

I vote for the tracks I like. However I reserve the right to I refuse to consider entries from people who break the 'spirit' of the contests.

Did you mean the people "break the spirit of the contests", or that their entries do?

Ummm, the person primarily. Obviously though, the clue to that would would quite often be their track(s).

So, for a hypothetical example, if someone posted and said

<<Example of reasonable example snipped>>

That's something I would view as a little problematic, and that's why I wanted to make the distinction the person and their entry breaking the spirit... Because if it's the person, it would mean you might skip an entry without hearing it. Your example of the kind of behavior that would redner a person non-grata is pretty reasonable (pursposefully breaking contest rules), but if you don't strictly define what "breaking the spirit of the kvr contest" is, and just use that as an example, then personal bias of another sort can creep in. Unless your example was equivalent to what you meant by "breaking the spirit of the competition" and not just a particular example.

[Barnadine]

Who is going to want to come out and say, "Yes, I let myself be influenced by personality"? Yet studies have shown this happens.

I don't think anyone would deny that, especially as you seem to be discussing 'personality' in its broadest sense. A musician's personality is entwined in the music, and will undoubtedly be an influence. The original poll was more concerned with whether people are influenced by specific internet behaviour (bad reviews, no votes) to which I think a vague but useful reply is possible. If you broaden this out to general personality, you will, as you say, probably never reach a firm conclusion, at least when it comes to judging music.

That's not to say an anonymous contest might not be fun.

[vurt]

Who is going to want to come out and say, "Yes, I let myself be influenced by personality"? Yet studies have shown this happens.

I don't think anyone would deny that, especially as you seem to be discussing 'personality' in its broadest sense. .

That's not to say an anonymous contest might not be fun.

id deny it ive voted for some right wankers,if i like the track i like the track

[Barnadine]

id deny it ive voted for some right wankers,if i like the track i like the track

Even right wankers aren't all bad then.

(Unless they flogged the track off someone else.)

[griels]

id deny it ive voted for some right wankers,if i like the track i like the track

OI! (you meant me right?)

[whyterabbyt]

JerGoertz quoth
That's something I would view as a little problematic, and that's why I wanted to make the distinction the person and their entry breaking the spirit... Because if it's the person, it would mean you might skip an entry without hearing it.

Indeed. But I listen to the tracks because that's what the competition is about.

Your example of the kind of behavior that would redner a person non-grata is pretty reasonable (pursposefully breaking contest rules), but if you don't strictly define what "breaking the spirit of the kvr contest" is, and just use that as an example, then personal bias of another sort can creep in.

It can, but that doesnt mean that it does. But then bias can creep in if I've just had a shitty day at work and someone's track is really upbeat and bouncy and I can't be doing with that. But since this is an informal event, and not, say, someone's job interview, and its now two hours listening to go through all the tracks just once, then any whittling down is part of that process.

Unless your example was equivalent to what you meant by "breaking the spirit of the competition" and not just a particular example.

Its a hypothetical example because that hasnt actually happened. But no single set of 'rules' could really define what could actually happen; I could only react to a specific actual event. But I reserve the right to do so, given that this is supposed to be a fun, community-type thing.

But this is an informal thing, so there's no formal rules on how I 'should' behave; I can only comment on how what I consider to be behaviour that would casue me to think that someone didnt deserve my (volunteered) time and effort.