slainte
robVoters are influenced?
-
- The Teach
- 8273 posts since 23 Jul, 2002 from flatness
-
- KVRAF
- 8384 posts since 18 Apr, 2004
Some statistics of my votes:
In the last 15 contests I voted for 82 people, there were 10 people who got more than 3 votes, 54 people who only got one vote (of which 10 times a #1)
Well, this is of course only me, I'm waiting for someone to give us the bigger picture of all votes
In the last 15 contests I voted for 82 people, there were 10 people who got more than 3 votes, 54 people who only got one vote (of which 10 times a #1)
Well, this is of course only me, I'm waiting for someone to give us the bigger picture of all votes
-
- The Teach
- 8273 posts since 23 Jul, 2002 from flatness
i know i have a 6 week holiday now but ...farlukar wrote:Well, this is of course only me, I'm waiting for someone to give us the bigger picture of all votes
... fook off !!!
slainte
rob-
- KVRAF
- 4319 posts since 20 Feb, 2004
In re-reading the original post by AndreasE, I have to mostly agree with you, whyterabbyt, that the focus of the poll was on interpersonal relationships tainting the voting... With the implicit meaning of option 3 being, "Nothing about personal relationships between myself and contestants affects my vote" (it could've been clearer, but it was pretty clear from context; AndreasE, other than this small quibble I find no fault with your poll 
). So a "but" which doesn't compromise this aspect of the meaning wouldn't invalidate the poll response. Of course if the "but" DOES then deal with something interpersonal, then I'd still say it's invalid.
But I wasn't sure what you meant by
). So a "but" which doesn't compromise this aspect of the meaning wouldn't invalidate the poll response. Of course if the "but" DOES then deal with something interpersonal, then I'd still say it's invalid.But I wasn't sure what you meant by
Did you mean the people "break the spirit of the contests", or that their entries do?whyterabbyt wrote: 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.
whyterabbyt wrote:JerGoertz quoth
In this particular poll, it could be argued that any substantial qualification would invalidate the meaning behind choosing option 3, which is that the person isn't influenced by anything but the song's merit.
It could be argued, yes. But you'd have to quibble over 'substantial qualification' first.
But you're in territory where the dialogue surrounding a poll typically expands on the details of someone's choice. Therefore its pretty much expected that the comments have more useful information than the (typically imprecise) poll.
This is, after all, an informal discussion, not a statistical analysis based around a carefully designed market research form.
It would be akin to saying, "Nothing but the song's quality influences me, but here's something else that influences me." Does that make sense?
The two other choices relate to 'interpersonal' interactions between the voter and 'candidate'. The third option is poorly phrased, but implicit in it is the fact that any other reasoning is non-personal. The formulator of the poll's first post quite clearly is concentrating on personal issues. Level of detail on the 'other' option would thus appear to be unimportant to his actual concerns.
This may be more a problem with the poll's construction than a poll taker's "honesty" or whatnot (see below).
No, I think its a problem with people misunderstanding the original poster's focus.
I think you misinterpret what Lady J said; she didn't say the poll responders were dishonest, but rather that the construction of poll itself is dishonest.
Except that her criticism was clearly aimed at people's actual responses, ie their followup postings.
She was clearly, and unequivocally saying 'why be so dishonest as to use this option and then post an explanation which doesnt entirely gel with the option chosen'
I think it would be more accurate (or less emotionally-loaded) to say that the poll is improperly constructed than "dishonest",
True
but I agree with her in spirit. There at least needs to be a 4th option.
Only if you misunderstand the apparant focus of the poll... interpersonal conflict's effect on voting... Any quibble over the phrasing of the 3rd option only comes from missing its point in relation to the first two. The third is a 'catch-all' which is assumes no interpersonal conflict.
Last edited by JerGoertz on Thu Jul 28, 2005 9:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A well-behaved signature.
-
- KVRAF
- 4319 posts since 20 Feb, 2004
I like the ideas about anonymous entries... If this could be feasible...
I'd pose another question: Before voting, how many entries do you actually give a fair listen to, all the way through?
If not all of them (be honest!) , what determines which you choose to hear before casting your ballot?
As before I'm not going to claim that a poll is an accurate reflection of people's actual attitudes & behaviors, but it would be interesting to hear what people say.
I'd pose another question: Before voting, how many entries do you actually give a fair listen to, all the way through?
If not all of them (be honest!
) , what determines which you choose to hear before casting your ballot?As before I'm not going to claim that a poll is an accurate reflection of people's actual attitudes & behaviors, but it would be interesting to hear what people say.
A well-behaved signature.
-
- KVRAF
- 7217 posts since 21 Aug, 2004 from Trondheim, Norway
I don't think I would be influenced by cash.
However, I don't think my integrity has ever been properly tested.
Could someone send me some money before next months vote, to see if I'm that easily corruptible? It would probably be a good idea to send a large amount, to really test my resistance to dirty tricks. PM me for account details.
However, I don't think my integrity has ever been properly tested.
Could someone send me some money before next months vote, to see if I'm that easily corruptible? It would probably be a good idea to send a large amount, to really test my resistance to dirty tricks. PM me for account details.
Rakkervoksen
-
- KVRAF
- 2093 posts since 19 Jun, 2003 from UTM 18 317254E 4295335N (WGS84/NAD83)
I try to be rigorously impartial to what I can suss about an artist's personality in relation to the song they've submitted. I definitely don't adjust my rank of a song because of how the artist may have reviewed or voted for me in the past. But I'd be lying if I said nothing else influences me. I'm influenced by countless inconsistent factors from one song to the next. I hate ranking or comparing songs because it's reminds me of what a poor judge of talent and style I really am. I'm so unqualified to discern the best songs each month. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if I was allowed to vote on a previous month's entries again that I'd rank a very different set of top contenders.
Here's things I usually consider benefit a song:
Does the song sound unique or engaging? I can't quantify those because they are measured differently by each person in relation to any given song. But I listen to and care about a lot of different kinds of music. OTOH, I've also heard (and personally created) a lot of crap. I've suffered through my share of formulaic arrangements, GM presets, and trendy foolishness.
Does the artist employ appropriate technique in terms of musicianship or engineering in the service of the song? Just like in my field of visual arts, I think form follows function. Virtuosity and slick production without a considerably substantive vehicle annoy me. I've heard brilliant songs sung off-key with crap instruments into a cheap cassette recorder - and I've heard heartbreakingly beautiful pristine top-end studio sessions.
Is there anything deeper then the surface sound? Is there a message, story or aural emotion that connects to me? Again, I don't thing I can offer any better explanation that I don't know what it is but I know what I like. However, I do think there are some intrinsically enticing psycho-acoustical properties to certain sounds and passages of sound. There's also the charm of storytelling. It doesn't have to be complex or melodramatic, but I find the deeper connections the most satisfying.
I try to read reviews others have written about each others songs so i can get a feel for what other's expectations and preferences will be, but I know that isn't accurate either because I'm not sure anyone else who reviews or votes has much better taste then me. I wish I could review more often, but I can't.
PS: I'll help with an anonymous contest. I be willing to be an honest non-participant who kept track of at least one level of participants. It seems that in order to be totally impartial, we'd need another person to scramble the entries a second time. Then any number of people could take on the hosting chores. It would be kinda complicated, but here's how:
All submission go to one person who keeps a list of who did what but ensures that each song has any originally personally traceable data stripped: tags names, etc. That person substitutes a unique identifier for the original artist name sends the files to a second person who once again keeps a list of incoming songs and again alters the unique identifier and passes the songs to hosts (so one host isn't saddled with 75 entries). In the end it should be straightforward to decipher who actually did what by comparing the two lists. One thing for sure, there'd be no resubmitting...
Here's things I usually consider benefit a song:
Does the song sound unique or engaging? I can't quantify those because they are measured differently by each person in relation to any given song. But I listen to and care about a lot of different kinds of music. OTOH, I've also heard (and personally created) a lot of crap. I've suffered through my share of formulaic arrangements, GM presets, and trendy foolishness.
Does the artist employ appropriate technique in terms of musicianship or engineering in the service of the song? Just like in my field of visual arts, I think form follows function. Virtuosity and slick production without a considerably substantive vehicle annoy me. I've heard brilliant songs sung off-key with crap instruments into a cheap cassette recorder - and I've heard heartbreakingly beautiful pristine top-end studio sessions.
Is there anything deeper then the surface sound? Is there a message, story or aural emotion that connects to me? Again, I don't thing I can offer any better explanation that I don't know what it is but I know what I like. However, I do think there are some intrinsically enticing psycho-acoustical properties to certain sounds and passages of sound. There's also the charm of storytelling. It doesn't have to be complex or melodramatic, but I find the deeper connections the most satisfying.
I try to read reviews others have written about each others songs so i can get a feel for what other's expectations and preferences will be, but I know that isn't accurate either because I'm not sure anyone else who reviews or votes has much better taste then me. I wish I could review more often, but I can't.
PS: I'll help with an anonymous contest. I be willing to be an honest non-participant who kept track of at least one level of participants. It seems that in order to be totally impartial, we'd need another person to scramble the entries a second time. Then any number of people could take on the hosting chores. It would be kinda complicated, but here's how:
All submission go to one person who keeps a list of who did what but ensures that each song has any originally personally traceable data stripped: tags names, etc. That person substitutes a unique identifier for the original artist name sends the files to a second person who once again keeps a list of incoming songs and again alters the unique identifier and passes the songs to hosts (so one host isn't saddled with 75 entries). In the end it should be straightforward to decipher who actually did what by comparing the two lists. One thing for sure, there'd be no resubmitting...
-
- KVRian
- 1367 posts since 25 Mar, 2002 from Australia
Yeah, I agree with the general thrust of this thread.
I'm not fussed by a bit of harsh criticism, and I don't have a good memory for votes. So when voting time comes, I'm happy to let internet personalities slide away and focus on the music. You could be Stalin's poodle, or even a politician, I don't care.
No doubt there are some people I vote for more often than others, and you could argue that this is the result of my unconsciously biased and statistically provable musical sympathies. But if you stop voting for people on the grounds that you enjoy their music, you might as well pull random names from your arse. Which, conveniently enough, is my usual tactic. That and my loyal ouija board.
I'm not fussed by a bit of harsh criticism, and I don't have a good memory for votes. So when voting time comes, I'm happy to let internet personalities slide away and focus on the music. You could be Stalin's poodle, or even a politician, I don't care.
No doubt there are some people I vote for more often than others, and you could argue that this is the result of my unconsciously biased and statistically provable musical sympathies. But if you stop voting for people on the grounds that you enjoy their music, you might as well pull random names from your arse. Which, conveniently enough, is my usual tactic. That and my loyal ouija board.
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1206 posts since 10 Apr, 2002 from Born, living and probably dying in Germany
Thanks.JerGoertz wrote:AndreasE, other than this small quibble I find no fault with your poll
Listen to some Monkey-Music-
- Beware the Quoth
- 35442 posts since 4 Sep, 2001 from R'lyeh Oceanic Amusement Park and Funfair
JerGoertz quoth
But I wasn't sure what you meant by
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
"Hey here's this electroclash track me and my band did a few months ago"
and posted a five-minute track in a competition entitled 'love snogs' (sic) then that'd be a 'erm, hold on a minute' moment. They'd probably get disqualified on that basis, so someone will almost certainly point out that its too long, so an hour later he posts
"Okay guys, Ive faded this out at two minutes, and its now two minutes long but its a great track off or forthcoming album and you should really listen to the full version. Oh and btw I hate MP3's so its a WAV file"
then I'd really start to be thinking "this guy's not actually interested in the competition, they're just pimping their track".
And then in the gossip track you see the guy go on about how they hired a professional producer with advance money from a small deal, and that's why it sounds so well produced, and at that point Im at the "f**k you, you dont get this at all" stage, and they go on a little mental list of people to remember to totally avoid even listening to on account of they've missed the whole 'sprit' of the thing.
That sorta thing.
But I wasn't sure what you meant by
whyterabbyt wrote: 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
"Hey here's this electroclash track me and my band did a few months ago"
and posted a five-minute track in a competition entitled 'love snogs' (sic) then that'd be a 'erm, hold on a minute' moment. They'd probably get disqualified on that basis, so someone will almost certainly point out that its too long, so an hour later he posts
"Okay guys, Ive faded this out at two minutes, and its now two minutes long but its a great track off or forthcoming album and you should really listen to the full version. Oh and btw I hate MP3's so its a WAV file"
then I'd really start to be thinking "this guy's not actually interested in the competition, they're just pimping their track".
And then in the gossip track you see the guy go on about how they hired a professional producer with advance money from a small deal, and that's why it sounds so well produced, and at that point Im at the "f**k you, you dont get this at all" stage, and they go on a little mental list of people to remember to totally avoid even listening to on account of they've missed the whole 'sprit' of the thing.
That sorta thing.
An idiot on Set Theory:
"In some cases there is an object called red that contains everything that is red. In much the same way a pot is a plate."
"In some cases there is an object called red that contains everything that is red. In much the same way a pot is a plate."
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1206 posts since 10 Apr, 2002 from Born, living and probably dying in Germany
No money, but I´ll compose a song only for you if you´ll vote for me #1 next month.Hovmod wrote:Could someone send me some money before next months vote, to see if I'm that easily corruptible?
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1206 posts since 10 Apr, 2002 from Born, living and probably dying in Germany
Concerning anonymous contest:
Quote from the contest rules:
"your track MUST be ...
... named in the format yearmonth-artistname-tracktitle (ie - 0606-artistname---tracktitle.mp3) with AT LEAST the artist and title fields of the ID tag completed (untagged entries will be disqualified"
I wonder how many will tag their entries with their names ...
Quote from the contest rules:
"your track MUST be ...
... named in the format yearmonth-artistname-tracktitle (ie - 0606-artistname---tracktitle.mp3) with AT LEAST the artist and title fields of the ID tag completed (untagged entries will be disqualified"
I wonder how many will tag their entries with their names ...
-
- KVRist
- 370 posts since 18 Feb, 2005 from Barcelona
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!
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!
-
- KVRist
- 360 posts since 27 Jul, 2004 from Cologne/Germany
Yes, actually, looking at the results of the poll: There is obviously no need for an anonymous contest ...Diek wrote: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!
Regards,
Tommy
Some music here
-
- KVRAF
- 2093 posts since 19 Jun, 2003 from UTM 18 317254E 4295335N (WGS84/NAD83)
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...) I think the anonymous contest was an attempt to try something different - a way to encourage people to try something new. As AndreasE noted about artist names in submissions - the same could be said for this forum or the web in general. How many of you would speak up so quickly and *honestly* if your real name was readily apparent. I know I take some measure of comfort in my relative anonymity - though anyone could easily discover my true name if they so desired. They could simply ask.
(Nothing personal to our fine officers...) I think the anonymous contest was an attempt to try something different - a way to encourage people to try something new. As AndreasE noted about artist names in submissions - the same could be said for this forum or the web in general. How many of you would speak up so quickly and *honestly* if your real name was readily apparent. I know I take some measure of comfort in my relative anonymity - though anyone could easily discover my true name if they so desired. They could simply ask.