Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[BatCountry]

Would there be a way to vote *without* seeing who else has voted, and randomizing the order of the entries as well?

You think that some players are being influenced because of the current voting system? [IE. some escaped lunatic will vote for the most popular suggestions for example?] Well in some extreme cases this might be true, however I doubt that this should be a problem at all...

Popularity bias is probably less likely in the case of this voting than the appetizer menu effect:
Everything looks good, and you tend to be unconsciously biased towards the first few items on the list.  People who are impulsive will most likely vote for the first fun sounding options and never reach lower options on the list, which just exaggerates the scores of the things at the top of the list.

[Tormy]

Would there be a way to vote *without* seeing who else has voted, and randomizing the order of the entries as well?

You think that some players are being influenced because of the current voting system? [IE. some escaped lunatic will vote for the most popular suggestions for example?] Well in some extreme cases this might be true, however I doubt that this should be a problem at all...

Popularity bias is probably less likely in the case of this voting than the appetizer menu effect:
Everything looks good, and you tend to be unconsciously biased towards the first few items on the list.  People who are impulsive will most likely vote for the first fun sounding options and never reach lower options on the list, which just exaggerates the scores of the things at the top of the list.

Yeah this makes sense indeed...Perhaps we should not be able to see the numbers of votes + the voters at all? Its enough if Toady can see that I suppose.
Either way, Im fine with everything, I am happy that we have a master voting system like this. 

[Footkerchief]

3 votes is starting to look pretty limited.  Wouldn't it make more sense to let each voter give a thumbs up/down/neutral to each suggestion?

[i2amroy]

3 votes is starting to look pretty limited.  Wouldn't it make more sense to let each voter give a thumbs up/down/neutral to each suggestion?

That would be cool, plus it would also allow some of those new suggestions to gain a foothold, as currently almost no one actually scrolls down to the bottom and looks at the suggestions that are way down there. This means that any new suggestion will not get voted for, even if it is really cool.

[Mikademus]

I mean, I get the point of checking out what kinds of suggestions people want the most. But I don't think it's necessarily going to result in the best possible suggestions, for

You're arguing against the Delphi Effect here: in any population, the most given answer will tend to be the best answer of the ones given.

Though not an absolute law, it has great prognosticative power in and social-scientific or knowledge-based field.

[Keldor]

Just to throw this out there, but here's a particularily nice example of how to give each item priorities for the suggestion list:

http://www.chaospro.de/scripts/vote.php

[Tormy]

Just to throw this out there, but here's a particularily nice example of how to give each item priorities for the suggestion list:

http://www.chaospro.de/scripts/vote.php

Hmmmm this is looking very good indeed. 

[G-Flex]

You're arguing against the Delphi Effect here: in any population, the most given answer will tend to be the best answer of the ones given.

Though not an absolute law, it has great prognosticative power in and social-scientific or knowledge-based field.

What makes you think this applies to a video game? Yes, I'm arguing against the premise that the most-given answer is going to be the best one, because in a creative field that is patent bullshit.

This is hardly even a "social-scientific or knowledge-based field". It's deciding what should go into a video game.

I provided arguments for why the most popular answer isn't necessary the best, and if you'd like to actually argue against that, go ahead.


[EDIT]

I also just looked up the Delphi Method and it's generally done with actual experts in the relevant fields. Also, anonymously. Also, in a feedback-based anonymous peer-review system. It's just a way of getting decent consensus out of experts in a field, in a more structured way. It has nothing to do with what we're doing here whatsoever, and bears little similarity, and wouldn't apply anyhow, especially since this, as opposed to being a scientific problem with a "right answer", is a creative/artistic endeavor by a single person.

[i2amroy]

Maybe a randomization if you have never voted, but I like to check to see how the vote is going from time to time. I really don't want to have to read/scan the entire list to see if Guilds has gone up or down.

I also like to peruse the lower end from time to time to see if there are any I want to support. If they were random, I'd have to look at each and every entry, instead of just scrolling to the bottom.

Overall, I think a random list would be an interface nightmare, but perhaps an initial blind poll (no names/#s) might help. In that one instance, random would be good as well.

What if there was a setting that would put the suggestions in order for you. Some button you could press and it would unrandomize it.

[CJN]

So, if Toady adds a feature, and the corresponding suggestion item is deleted, are those that voted on it sent a message that they might want to recast their votes?

[Draco18s]

So, if Toady adds a feature, and the corresponding suggestion item is deleted, are those that voted on it sent a message that they might want to recast their votes?

Any I delete I will IM everyone who voted.  It's an easy copy-paste from the voting to the PM system.

[Fikes]

Is it possible to contact the originator of a suggestion? For example, I'd like to see better military controls and one of the things I'd like ot have under that heading would be switching spar weapons. I could just add the "better military controls" but I'd rather try and combine it with the topic already there.

[Othob Rithol]

You might want to hold off on that Fikes.

Toady is working on something right now that may affect your suggestion  (or even fill it)

09/18/2008: Nothing interesting to report. Currently going over screens, etc. updating to the new position system. Then it'll be on to using the new structure to implement some changes to how squads work, which will hopefully address some long-standing issues with the military.

Never forget to read the Dev notes

[Mephansteras]

Here is another suggestion for splitting things up a bit, vote-wise. I scanned the thread, and didn't see anything like this, but I apologize if someone mentioned it and I just missed it.

Anyway, why not break the suggestions into 3 categories:
  Major changes: large categories like 'Religion', 'Underground diversity', etc.   
  Minor Changes: Small or tightly scoped changes to existing elements, such as 'Allow traders to bring sand/water/rough gems', 'milkable animals', etc.
  Minor additions: Small or tightly scoped additions to the game, such as: Training Dummies, Rope ladders, etc.

The idea being that if everyone gets one vote in each category, we avoid the "Everyone votes for the big categories, since that has more stuff they want' syndrome. It also means that Toady gets an idea of the smaller changes that he can add in that would be most appreciated. He can then do those as a break from the larger arcs.

Thoughts?

[Granite26]

Who really cares if the votes at the top tend to get more attention from the people who can't be bothered to read all the way down?  The people that DO read through will get to pick the second tier applications, which will be where the trickle votes go to after the top tier (beneficieries of the 'appetizer effect') get knocked off.  More people feel like their vote counted, etc etc.

It's not like only 3 of the things are going to get done, it's an informal straw poll to show the dev where the primary interest is.