Think Draw - Picture - Simple, fair solution

Title: Simple, fair solution
created on 04 May 09

Please login to rate or comment:

Comments on this picture (37):
1. matthew wrote: You also need to limit the number of alias logins a person can have...
2. marg wrote: please rate this picture ('1' is fine !) if you think we should try basing the 'Top 5' on the pictures which actually rate the highest ! (see forum entry with same title)
3. matthew wrote: nice job on the numbers...
4. marg wrote: matthew.. I don't think there's a way of doing that, without excluding a load of people.. you're talking some form of authentication, aren't you ?
5. matthew wrote: oops... I rated it already because I thought you did a fine job on the pic... isn't the top 5 already done that way???
6. matthew wrote: Yes, i guess that would be a good word for it... I have 4 logins at my house... me, my wife, my youngest daughter & ThinkDrawUS... I would be ok limiting that & have the 3 of us use the same login...
7. marg wrote: matthew.. did you just deliberately choke this proposal with your own waffle ?
8. Login wrote: Marg, I want just the opposite ... 'most ratings' is fairer than 'highest rating', which is encouraging manipulative voting.
9. matthew wrote: ROFLMAO... What the heck is my own waffle... I wish I could agree on the perfect solution to the issue... But I just don't see a system that would be manipulative proof...
10. marg wrote: sorry, Login - I really like most ratings and this wouldn't get away from that. People who vote '1' wouldn't vote a '5' anyway, so if someone votes 1 it just adds to your score - and your 'most ratings'. If you allow people to actually rate a picture '3'
11. marg wrote: .. or '4', it would allow a more honest appraisal, rather than the '5' we currently have to give, regardless. Every rating would count - and the people who rate low would only add to the total, not diminish it - think it through ?
12. matthew wrote: I soooooo agree as long as each person is limited to one vote... instead of having as many alias logins as they wish... 1 IP address = 1 login ID... If you have multiple people in your house you can request a "waiver" from Rachel to have a 2nd or 3rd logi
13. matthew wrote: 2nd or 3rd login... but nobody could creat 40 or 50 logins that way...
14. LadyO wrote: I could be wrong, but it seems to me when you visit the showcase, you're able to vote on drawings even if you voted for them previously. I know because I voted for one I liked before realizing I had voted for it in the Gallery.
15. LadyO wrote: Nope, I was wrong. I just tried it. It will allow you to rate, but it won't register the vote if you've already voted. Never mind! LOL
16. marg wrote: Oh well.. I guess I was wrong and people don't want this - Login, happy to support your idea instead !
17. mostblessedone wrote: Marg, your system makes sense to me. It seems worth trying for a month to see how it really works.
18. lynnspotter wrote: Marg & Login~I'm confused. Aren't you both asking for the same thing~most ratings? Adding up the #'s people rate a pic instead of averaging?
19. marg wrote: almost, lynnspotter.. I was allowing people to vote 1-5, Login's suggesting a straight vote.. I've actually always been happy with both - ANYTHING but what we've currently got !
20. Baldur wrote: ok marg, I voted a '1'
21. lynnspotter wrote: Thanks! marg.
22. Qsilv wrote: I really prefer the 1 - 5 as a type of comment in itself. Often I've no time to consider words, but I'd LOVE to be able to USE those slightly lower votes as a POSITIVE perk, not as a veto.
23. gwinnyb wrote: I am so sad that this is still a make or break problem. I think a 1-5 vote with a running total as positive number would work well as Qsilv says
24. Robindcr8l wrote: I'm not sure I understand the current system. It says that the top 5 are based on a weighted average of the picture rating and the mean rating. What does that mean? I guess I thought that meant they were counting the number of votes as well as the scor
25. Robindcr8l wrote: ...scores. I have to say that I hear what all of you are complaining about, and maybe I don't place as much value in all of this as the handful of people who consistently make the top 5, but none of these solutions seem like they will totally resolve the
26. Robindcr8l wrote: issue. There's no solution that seems full-proof to me. It's humans contributing and humans judging and people are quirky. I don't even bother trying to compete for top5 because I don't have the same level of talent as the frequent flyers there. So all
27. Robindcr8l wrote: this site is for me is fun. Maybe I'm lucky that way.
28. Login wrote: OK ... I'm with you, now that I fully understand what it is you want. No averaging of votes; revert to the o - 5 voting, as was the original intent; cumulative overall totals.
29. Login wrote: What can we offer Rachel in return for more presents?
30. raydog wrote: Nice
31. matthew wrote: lol @ Login... It does seem like "gifts" from above when we get new stuff...
32. Login wrote: Qsilv's comment swung me ... the ability to use the lower votes as encouragement, rather than as a knock down.
33. marg wrote: hey, thanks Login.. but that was what I was after.. 'maybe 1-2 for 'nice effort' or 4 for 'really good', without having to rate everything a 5 or blast the picture's chances'
34. JackJack wrote: ITS 15 !! lol
35. Login wrote: Yep! It's a sound solution.
36. Login wrote: But what do you think of this vote ban? I think it will bring Think Draw to a grinding halt ... we're nearly there now.
37. Kugusch wrote: I think it's worth a try...