Another Patch Contest?

[MtL]

@joel - Welcome to the patch contests!

I think that the very long URL in your first post is messing with the width - is there anyway that you could shorten it, or maybe just delete it, so that the thread is readable for everyone?

I got an automatically generated message saying that my links wouldn't display until i had made 5 posts. I think this is 5!

If my first post is still borked after I post this, then yes, I'll certainly go edit it.

[Slinky Productions]

Yes, someone has to curate things - but this can be done in such a way that they can still take part. If anonymizing is required then that person can no longer enter. The problem then becomes finding someone who is willing to do the work for next to no reward.

why couldn't the curator still take part ? s/he contributes their patch as everyone else does, and everyone votes for it as usual. The only issue is who will the curator vote for ? That is a trust issue and in my scenario we only have to trust one person to vote without bias. That's much easier for me to stomach than the current system.

[Slinky Productions]

and if I'm not mistaken in the current system the curator can't vote anyways

[Bronto Scorpio]

@joel - Welcome to the patch contests!

I think that the very long URL in your first post is messing with the width - is there anyway that you could shorten it, or maybe just delete it, so that the thread is readable for everyone?

I got an automatically generated message saying that my links wouldn't display until i had made 5 posts. I think this is 5!

If my first post is still borked after I post this, then yes, I'll certainly go edit it.

Welcome

I really like your idea!

Cheers
Dennis

[hakey]

why couldn't the curator still take part ? s/he contributes their patch as everyone else does, and everyone votes for it as usual. The only issue is who will the curator vote for ? That is a trust issue and in my scenario we only have to trust one person to vote without bias

Well, if you're going to go to all that trouble to make it scrupulously fair seems a bit of a waste of time unless you make it absolutely 100% water tight.

I'd rather keep it simple and trust that most people will play nicely (and the odd one that doesn't won't make much difference anyway).

and if I'm not mistaken in the current system the curator can't vote anyways

It's not that they can't, it's just that whilst xh3rv did the honours he chose not to vote. I curated the first few ZPC's and, IIRC, entered and voted in them.

[Slinky Productions]

Well, if you're going to go to all that trouble to make it scrupulously fair seems a bit of a waste of time unless you make it absolutely 100% water tight.

I'd rather keep it simple and trust that most people will play nicely (and the odd one that doesn't won't make much difference anyway).

and if I'm not mistaken in the current system the curator can't vote anyways

It's not that they can't, it's just that whilst xh3rv did the honours he chose not to vote. I curated the first few ZPC's and, IIRC, entered and voted in them.

exaggeration is a sign of a weak argument.

it's no trouble. it's not 'scrupulously' fair. It's simple. And fair in it's simplest form.
And you want to keep the current system, with all it's flaws in terms of impartiality and fairness, under the guise of trusting everyone rather than trust one trustworthy person to vote impartially ? whilst claiming that strategic voters who would abuse the current system would be ineffectual ?

there's more contradictions in that post than I can shake a stick at.

[Slinky Productions]

and by the way I will be happy to curate the next competition under my proposed system and do all that boring admin work. it will be a real chore but somehow I will manage

[hakey]

exaggeration is a sign of a weak argument.

As I said before, it's a discussion not an argument - argument would be exaggerating things a little.

And, again, if enough folk want to do things your way I'd go along with the majority view.

[bmrzycki]

I like the current method, it's simple. As someone that's marshaled this contest as a volunteer there's already enough work to do without adding a managed dropbox account, further renaming of presets, or some complicated double-blind voting system held on another site.

1. We don't use dropbox or other sites because not everyone can access them. For example, mcnoone lives in China and they're very particular about what sites he's allowed to visit. E-Mail attachments works best because it seems to be the easiest for everyone in the past.

2. Accountability. If we held the voting off-site that means (i) more work for the curator, and (ii) no way for the curator to be certain the ballot box is being stuffed. The 1st prize is worth several hundred dollars, there's strong incentive for someone to game the system. All it takes is for someone to watch the forum, collect 20-30 KVR names and then vote for his/her patch using the other person's name. If we hold the voting here then it's trivial for the admins to see if hacking or 1 person creating multiple logins occurs.

3. I don't see how spending extra time to rename a bunch of presets 000,001,002 somehow magically removes the bias. People are voting on the sound, not the name. And even if we do rename them, do we have to remove the playing suggestions too? Some people have a characteristic way of describing their patches and we should scrub that too. Wait, some submitters have a trademark way of using aftertouch or modwheel or pitchbend, should we forbid using those controllers because someone "might" realize it's person a?

4. We've run this contest now 15 times and the system works. If people don't like it and don't want to contribute that's their choice. If you're worried we're all somehow colluding so our friend can get Zebra2 for free I'd heartily disagree. Everyone submitting wants that 1st prize, what incentive do they have to help someone else win? And even with your proposed system, what's to stop the users after the patches come out, listen to them and then PM their buddy and say "vote for 013. that's me". This isn't the freaking UN security entrance, it's a cordial contest to generate more fun sounds for the u-he community.

The dangerous thing about the word fair is it means so many different things to different people. Ask the Israeli's what's the "fair" solution to the middle east. Then ask the Palestinians. The world isn't fair, sorry.

[hakey]

Don't take this the wrong way slinky but you've only just signed up and you've been pretty confrontational for someone so new to the board - have you posted here under a different name before?

Drumtarded perhaps?

Apologies if I'm wrong.

[Bronto Scorpio]

Everything what bmrzycki said +1

Cheers
Dennis

[Slinky Productions]

exaggeration is a sign of a weak argument.

As I said before, it's a discussion not an argument - argument would be exaggerating things a little.

And, again, if enough folk want to do things your way I'd go along with the majority view.

I know it's a discussion not an argument. But within this discussion we are offering arguments to support our point of view. THAT is the type of argument I was referring to.


Anyway I've offered my suggestion, I said the naming convention isn't a deal breaker, and I've offered to curate. I'm kind of wondering why you bothered asking the question to which I initially replied in the first place.

[hakey]

Everything what bmrzycki said +1

+1

[Slinky Productions]

I like the current method, it's simple. As someone that's marshaled this contest as a volunteer there's already enough work to do without adding a managed dropbox account, further renaming of presets, or some complicated double-blind voting system held on another site.

1. We don't use dropbox or other sites because not everyone can access them. For example, mcnoone lives in China and they're very particular about what sites he's allowed to visit. E-Mail attachments works best because it seems to be the easiest for everyone in the past.

2. Accountability. If we held the voting off-site that means (i) more work for the curator, and (ii) no way for the curator to be certain the ballot box is being stuffed. The 1st prize is worth several hundred dollars, there's strong incentive for someone to game the system. All it takes is for someone to watch the forum, collect 20-30 KVR names and then vote for his/her patch using the other person's name. If we hold the voting here then it's trivial for the admins to see if hacking or 1 person creating multiple logins occurs.

3. I don't see how spending extra time to rename a bunch of presets 000,001,002 somehow magically removes the bias. People are voting on the sound, not the name. And even if we do rename them, do we have to remove the playing suggestions too? Some people have a characteristic way of describing their patches and we should scrub that too. Wait, some submitters have a trademark way of using aftertouch or modwheel or pitchbend, should we forbid using those controllers because someone "might" realize it's person a?

4. We've run this contest now 15 times and the system works. If people don't like it and don't want to contribute that's their choice. If you're worried we're all somehow colluding so our friend can get Zebra2 for free I'd heartily disagree. Everyone submitting wants that 1st prize, what incentive do they have to help someone else win? And even with your proposed system, what's to stop the users after the patches come out, listen to them and then PM their buddy and say "vote for 013. that's me". This isn't the freaking UN security entrance, it's a cordial contest to generate more fun sounds for the u-he community.

The dangerous thing about the word fair is it means so many different things to different people. Ask the Israeli's what's the "fair" solution to the middle east. Then ask the Palestinians. The world isn't fair, sorry.

tl;dr

[hakey]

tl;dr

Somehow I doubt that you're going to be here long enough to curate anything other than your own exit.