"John Coppens" <joh### [at] johncoppenscom> wrote in message 
news:200### [at] johncoppenscom...
> On Thu,  3 Jul 2008 11:15:33 EDT
> "milco2006" <mil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>
>> > Thanks very much for that Stephen, much appreciated. The 20/20/20
>> > system is something that will probably be implemented in time for the
>> > next voting,
>>
>> I have to say that adding a bonus of 20 to everyone who votes seems a
>> little strange as the only reason I did not vote (as discussed in
>> previous thread here) is that I could not, thus those who vote gain a
>> good boost by getting 20 extra points for each section for voting.
>> Surely it would be more logical to add their average score to their
>> overall to make up the difference.
>
> And in a previous message, I found: (Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:49:50 +0100)
>
>> If you enter the next round,
>> you will get rating and commenting privileges. It's designed to keep
>> members interested and possibly entering, and, as we all know, feedback
>> on any given image is always good too. :)
>
> So, effectively a first entry would receive 20/20/20 points less than
> one from an established (and voting) member? Maybe we should give an
> initial submission 20/20/20 for free to equalize the field?

 Hi John,

   Heh, well, that's the general idea of course. That a score of 20/20/20 is 
given to everyone that can vote. But, I have to admit that I don't like the 
present situation with new-users. I'll look into this.


>
> Conceptually I don't understand how voting could improve the artistic
> value of a submission (or concept, tech value, for that matter)... Mixing
> apples and oranges? (of course I understand the need for voter
> incentive, but is this the right way?)

     Well, one thing I can say is that, with experience, this is one hard 
cooky to crumble. Getting it right is the aim, but that certainly isn't 
easy.

        And as for your actual question in your last sentence... Why not? I 
mean, how can anyone force someone to vote otherwise? Picture this scenario: 
We have a topic that sounds fantastic to a lot of people - they all 
participate - but *no-one* votes/rates/comments - no-one.

     Who wins? What do I put on the front page for the supposed winner(s)?


>
> Anyway, I would suggest that having a completely separate site for these
> competitions does no good to increasing the exposure of the competition
> (or raytracing in general).


  Not quite sure what you mean with this...



> Though the work of St. is surely appreciated,


     Thank you. I'm only trying to get back what we all miss.



> wouldn't being a part of something more popular boost things a little?
> (maybe - just a suggestion - something like deviantart.com?) It would
> solve things like 20/20/20 - participants should be excluded from
> voting.  The votes should come from the general public (IMHO).

      Well, don't forget that this comp., (TINA CHeP), is supposed to be in 
keeping with the IRTC as a 'stand-in' project whilst it was on hiatus. And, 
as we all know, the IRTC is being re-established - which is good, and I wish 
the team well. I'll be the first in the queue to participate, that's for 
sure. ;)

    But, the TC-RTC comp. will always be around even if it is a backup.



> > It would also help with promoting TC-RTC - put 'raytracing competition'
> in Google, and the initial 5 pages of links, none points to TC-RTC.

    Yep, because I simply haven't promoted it yet to any search engine. When 
I feel the time is right, I will, and I have the experience with that side 
of things. I don't want, and won't have, egg on my face to the world. Can 
you understand that?


>
> Please take these (radical?) ideas as suggestions, not criticism. I don't
> want to start a flame war...

   No flame war here John. I really appreciate your thoughts and idea's. 
Keep them coming.

   Oh, and btw, yes, you can enter as many times as you want in all 
categories. (Sorry I didn't get back to you).

      ~Steve~


>
> John

Post a reply to this message