|
|
Charles C wrote:
>
>
> David Buck wrote:
>> 3) Voting
>> - Votes would be on a scale of 1 to 10
>> - A vote of 0 means the voter didn't rank the image
>> - A voter must rank all images (except their own)
>> - If they don't rank all images, they can't submit their votes
> A vote of 0 would also be impossible given the next two items.
>
>>
>> - Voters don't see who submitted the image until voting is finished
> I'm just wondering how this would affect reading the making-of
> descriptions...
The making-of descriptions should be worded in such a way as to not give
away the identity of the artist. Realistically speaking, though, people
will often be able to guess the artist based on their previous works. I
also see artists submitting works in progress to the POVRay news groups
for comments. This may be a problem we can't prevent.
>
>> - Voters don't see other votes or voter comments until voting is
>> finished
>
> Makes sense.
>
>> - Overall is the total score of Technical + artistic + concept
>>
>> - 1st place, 2nd place and 3rd place are submissions with the three
>> highest average overall scores.
>> - i.e., total of overall scores / votes cast
>
> Do you mean an individual entrant's total score divided by the number of
> voters? While seeing the average would be interesting, dividing by the
> number of voters wouldn't change the results in a system with
> all-or-nothing voting.
It makes a difference if some voters submitted entries and others
didn't. Those who submitted entries can't vote on their own entries.
This means that it's unfair to just total up the ratings. It would be
as if they had ranked themselves as 0 in all categories.
Instead, I will add up all of the ranks for an entry and divide by the
number of people allowed to vote for that entry (which will be everyone
but the submitter).
>
>>
>> Does this sound reasonable?
>
> Yes, except for a couple questions. :) Thank you for doing this.
> Charles
My pleasure. It means I get to play with Seaside, to work again with
the POVRay community and to encourage people to push the limits of the
technology. It's all good.
David Buck
Post a reply to this message
|
|