silver_sun (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
silver_sun) wrote2012-05-21 02:59 pm
silver_sun) wrote2012-05-21 02:59 pm
Entry tags:
Last Author Standing alternative voting systems.
I'v been thinking about Last Author Standing voting systems, and what the alternatives might be for the usual 'one postive, one and or more negative' voting systems.
1. People vote and leave feedback for the story they'd like to win.
Advantage: It's simple, nobody gets a negative vote.
Disadvantages: If multiple people get no votes at all who gets voted out? The solutions would be either keep voting open until there's only one story with no votes (which means not being able to have a fix posting schedule for the challenges) or that all stories with no votes are voted out - which could if everybody liked the same story in the first round that everybody would be voted out in one go.
2. People vote and leave feedback for three stories they like and rank them first, second and third. Points, 3 for first, 2 for second, and 1 for third are awarded. The story with most points wins.
Advantages: It's simple, nobody gets any negative votes.
Disadvantages: Still has the possibility for multiple people to have no votes at all, although this is less of a problem if only a few writers taking part. Having to leave three lots of feedback might put some voters off - although as it's three positive votes they might not mind so much.
3. People vote and leave feedback for all the stories and rank them first, second and third etc until all stories in that round have been ranked. Points are awarded based on how many stories there are (so points from 10 to 1 for ten stories, points from 15 to 1 for fifteen stories.) The story with the most points wins
Advantages: Everybody gets feedback every round. Less likely to produce a tie.
Disadvantages: Having to rank all the stories and leave so much feedback might put people off from voting.
4. People vote for all the stories and rank them first, second and third etc until all stories in that round have been ranked. Points are awarded based on how many stories there are (so points from 10 to 1 for ten stories, points from 15 to 1 for fifteen stories.) But only leave feedback for the one they ranked first. The story with the most points wins.
Advantages: Simple. Voters unlikely to be put odd by only having to leave 1 piece of positive feedback.
Disadvantages: Higher chance of writers not getting any feedback.
5. An LJ poll, you vote for the story you like best.
Advantages: More people likely to vote. Simple to use.
Disadvantages: Nobody gets any feedback at all. Has the same problem as the single postive feedback vote system - you could easily end up with multiple stories with no votes, posing the same question of how do you decide who gets voted off.
Suggestions welcome for other voting systems welcome.
Questions:
Would you be more likely to take part in a Last Author Standing if you knew you'd never get negative feedback? (You may still of course get no feedback depending on the voting system used.)
Is negative feedback a useful part of Last Author Standing challenges? and if this is the case would it be helpful for the rules of the LAS to say that the negative vote needs to be constructive critisism rather than 'I just didn't like this one as much as the rest'?
If you had to give feedback on all the stories in a round, say 12 stories, would this put you off voting? or would you be pleased to have the opportunity to tell all the writers what you think about their entry?
Any other questions that are important and that I've not thought of?
I'm trying to find this out because (although I'd not change how the current round of Torchwood-Las is voted) whether people who like a different system for running round 2 of it later in the year after the current one finishes. (Yes I probably should have done this before setting up the Torchwood-las comm in the first place, rather than just going with the usual system.)
1. People vote and leave feedback for the story they'd like to win.
Advantage: It's simple, nobody gets a negative vote.
Disadvantages: If multiple people get no votes at all who gets voted out? The solutions would be either keep voting open until there's only one story with no votes (which means not being able to have a fix posting schedule for the challenges) or that all stories with no votes are voted out - which could if everybody liked the same story in the first round that everybody would be voted out in one go.
2. People vote and leave feedback for three stories they like and rank them first, second and third. Points, 3 for first, 2 for second, and 1 for third are awarded. The story with most points wins.
Advantages: It's simple, nobody gets any negative votes.
Disadvantages: Still has the possibility for multiple people to have no votes at all, although this is less of a problem if only a few writers taking part. Having to leave three lots of feedback might put some voters off - although as it's three positive votes they might not mind so much.
3. People vote and leave feedback for all the stories and rank them first, second and third etc until all stories in that round have been ranked. Points are awarded based on how many stories there are (so points from 10 to 1 for ten stories, points from 15 to 1 for fifteen stories.) The story with the most points wins
Advantages: Everybody gets feedback every round. Less likely to produce a tie.
Disadvantages: Having to rank all the stories and leave so much feedback might put people off from voting.
4. People vote for all the stories and rank them first, second and third etc until all stories in that round have been ranked. Points are awarded based on how many stories there are (so points from 10 to 1 for ten stories, points from 15 to 1 for fifteen stories.) But only leave feedback for the one they ranked first. The story with the most points wins.
Advantages: Simple. Voters unlikely to be put odd by only having to leave 1 piece of positive feedback.
Disadvantages: Higher chance of writers not getting any feedback.
5. An LJ poll, you vote for the story you like best.
Advantages: More people likely to vote. Simple to use.
Disadvantages: Nobody gets any feedback at all. Has the same problem as the single postive feedback vote system - you could easily end up with multiple stories with no votes, posing the same question of how do you decide who gets voted off.
Suggestions welcome for other voting systems welcome.
Questions:
Would you be more likely to take part in a Last Author Standing if you knew you'd never get negative feedback? (You may still of course get no feedback depending on the voting system used.)
Is negative feedback a useful part of Last Author Standing challenges? and if this is the case would it be helpful for the rules of the LAS to say that the negative vote needs to be constructive critisism rather than 'I just didn't like this one as much as the rest'?
If you had to give feedback on all the stories in a round, say 12 stories, would this put you off voting? or would you be pleased to have the opportunity to tell all the writers what you think about their entry?
Any other questions that are important and that I've not thought of?
I'm trying to find this out because (although I'd not change how the current round of Torchwood-Las is voted) whether people who like a different system for running round 2 of it later in the year after the current one finishes. (Yes I probably should have done this before setting up the Torchwood-las comm in the first place, rather than just going with the usual system.)
no subject
I think this is especially the case if the writer's story was the one voted off. The really might not want have an open thread with everybody discussing it.
So I've left the post so if writers wish to ask for extra feedback they can.
Cutting out really bad feedback such 'This sucked, my cat could write better' or 'you wrote Jack/Gwen yuck yuck yuck' that's obviously not constructive isn't too difficult. And even without a filtering system in place I would not be counting them.
Then there's feedback like 'I really liked all the stories including this one, the only reason I'm giving this one a negative vote is because I felt the rest of the entries used the prompts in a more imaginative ways than this one'
This isn't constructive either, but I'd probably let something like this through currently (although under a strict constructive criticism only it wouldn't) because while not that helpful in telling the writer how they could have improved it, as it's not rude, and they did let them know they did also find things they liked about it.
Under the only constructive criticism rule the biggest problems would be types of feedback that are subjective.
Such as feedback where the voter they thought the characters in the story were acting out of character.
This could be down to the writer and reviewer having different views of the character. (Like the idea that Ianto became vegetarian after Countrycide so having him eat a pepperoni pizza in a series 2 setting fic is OOC. (I don't see this one really any more - but it was a big thing at one time - and the only basis for it was one of the extra on the BBC S1 website of an IM conversation between Ianto and Tosh where she asks him if he wants a sandwich, Tosh tend suggests a salad, he says okay and asks for prawn cocktail flavour crisps as well - this is apparently proof of Ianto and Tosh being vegetarian. I could see argument for either, but neither is definite canon.)
Or if the criticism is that the story ignores canon? Say it's set directly after Cyberwoman, but Ianto isn't on suspension? That's down to whether you consider the extras on BBCAmerica's website canon.
Or that something isn't realistic? (I've actually had that one when I took part in WIAD - I got a negative vote for writing that the survivors of Torchwood One had an unofficial memorial service on the anniversary of it - the review was basically 'nobody, not even Ianto would be so miserable as to have a memorial on the anniversary of something like that - they'd all want to forget it.) (Although was still better than some feedbacks I've had on multifandom LASs - writing over 40's spanking will get some weird feedback - not exactly bad just deeply weird.)
They might honestly believe that, but does it count as constructive?
I think perhaps better guidelines on what sort of thing is okay to have in a negative vote might be the way to go. (certainly for the current round as any new voting system wouldn't be introduced until the next one - unless it's what everyone wants.)
With example like this.
Good example: 'I liked the concept behind the story, but because of the frequently changing tenses and points of view I found it hard to follow.'
rather than
'Okay story ruined by awful grammar. Next time find a tense and stick to it.'
These express the same thoughts about the story, and while a writer might not want to end up receiving either, the first example is easier to deal with.
no subject
LOL!! I want to know more about this!!
no subject
The story is here http://the-silver-sun.livejournal.com/133693.html#cutid1
The odd comments were the LAS feedback ones, rather than the ones in reply to the fic when I posted it out to the Primeval comms (It's hard to find a nicer set of fans than those at primeval denial, they all seem to get on so well, I can't remember ever seeing an argument over their and all seem to write birthday ficlets for each other and have daily chat threads).
The LAS comments were along the lines of 'eww wrinkly sex' (in a couple of variations) and 'They couldn't have a relationship that people know about because of 'Don't ask, dont' tell'' (Which considering the characters in question in a UK based show where we don't have that rule and neither of the character are American I don't get why they thought it would apply. Apart from that they are both part of an organisation which deals with dinosaurs coming through holes in time, not part of the regular army.)
no subject
I read the fic and thought it was great! Spanking is definitely my kink and Ryan's initial reaction was just brilliant!