If you have any other points that I should add to this article, let me know.
I will be referencing the data from the votes throughout this article, so here they are:
Fig. 1: (final votes)
Fig. 2: (votes that includes chibilord_'s and Baufritz's brother)
Onto my points about the CC16 rating system.
The “1-2-3” rating system can be a very untrustworthy system
What is the “1-2-3” system?
Each vote gets a certain amount of points for each entry, like so:
- 1st place: 3 points
2nd place: 2 points
3rd place: 1 point
Who here really truly went through each level, and carefully decided which level would be a very effective Character Creator, for 3 levels? Most people were very definite on their 1st place choice, but most people just picked their 2nd and 3rd place levels quickly without much thought, except papaya who did a full review on each level, and matthewbny who explained this choices. Truly rating and reviewing each level takes a great deal of time with the amount of submissions and the complexity of each submission, and most people don't want to take that time to do so. Papaya’s review on the levels changed the mind on a couple people, including mine.
Re-look at the “1-2-3” system on an ethical level more than numerical:
- 1st place: “Awesome! Favorite level out of all submissions!”
2nd place: “Pretty good, but not amazing”
3rd place: “Meh, I just picked this one ‘cuz it was somewhat cool, or I just don't want to really think about it much”
Now taking what we’ve discussed about ethics, assuming that 1st place decisions are 100% truthful, 2nd place decisions are 66.6% truthful, and 3rd place decisions are 33.3% truthful. Now multiplying these truthful values to the original "1-2-3" system now the points for each place would equate to:
- 1st place: 3 points
2nd place: 4/3 points
3rd place: 1/3 points
Conclusions on the “1-2-3” system
The “1-2-3” system could work if every person is required to explain their choices on a level of at least what matthewbny did. Short, sweet, to the point. Weighting each vote level could also remove some bias. The point of all these adjustments is so you think before you act, and choose the most important, effective, and featurable level in your opinion.
The method of rating resulted in tactical rating strategies
Anybody could see anybody’s vote when voting for CC16. When you vote for something major like president or somebody important like that, do you get to see other people’s votes, and change them after you submitted? No. You have to decide your decision before your time to vote. You think over the pros and cons of each candidate to make sure that your vote helps choose who you think will do better than all other candidates.
Because everyone could see each others votes for CC16 voting, it was very tempting and very easy to vote in such a way that would push your desired winner to the front while not aiding those you didn’t want to win. If nobody knows who anyone else voted for, people will be a lot more honest in their decisions.
When voting for the USA president, you have to be a legal citizen of the United States of America to vote, which allows for legitimate voting matters. On the internet, you can create new accounts to boost your vote. You can also get a friend or family member to vote in your favor.
According to ThatOneFox, chibilord_ was not a valid vote because he “because it’s his only post on the forum, and he never speaks in the discord.” chibilord_ does speak on the discord from time to time, but what is a good measure of activity? How do you determine who is and isn’t active enough to get a vote?
Conclusion on rating methods
All votes for something as large as CC16 should be done via some sort of system that is a one time submission, and cannot be changed afterwards. In regards to “sketchy” people voting, I do understand where ThatOneFox and others were coming from, but to be honest, there are some people in the discord chat and in the OMB forms that haven’t touched Atmosphir in years, and would be considered valid voters by moderators. A system must be defined by the OMB community that determines if a person is an active member of this OMB community or not.
Final Thoughts:
BECAUSE we are already are going to cycle between the 3 levels, and BECAUSE people thought all 3 levels were very well put together, and BECAUSE this rating system was pretty screwed from the start, why don’t we veto the results, and give 1st place to the 3 levels that collectively truly deserved it (its just a suggestion). I personally enjoy all 3 levels, and its great to have all 3 as levels for the Character Creator.
(holy shit that was a lot of typing)