![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
silver_sunI'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.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-05-22 07:26 pm (UTC)The other thing to do would be have a feedback post on the results, which you did, but make it more structured with each fic represented maybe? See I feel strongly that I want to stand by my comments negative or positive, so I'd happily leave open feedback.
The other thing I'd say is that if you decide to stick to the current system, I wonder whether on the voting poll you could make it quite strict and not accept votes that aren't constructive. I know WIAD used to operate like that. I know it's a bit of work for you as a mod, but having said that, it's quite easy to see when a review is just a bit horrid and not helpful.
Thanks for thinking about this Silver, because I think it's awful that anyone may have been hurt by thoughtless voting in something that should just be a bit of fun, and reviews don't need to say the story is bad, just why it didn't work for the person voting.
Also I do think the current system has an inherent problem, that is that you can get the most positive votes, and still potentially be voted out, or certainly not win, and that does bother me.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-22 09:33 pm (UTC)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
Date: 2012-05-25 04:05 am (UTC)LOL!! I want to know more about this!!
no subject
Date: 2012-05-25 06:29 am (UTC)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
Date: 2012-05-26 12:33 am (UTC)I read the fic and thought it was great! Spanking is definitely my kink and Ryan's initial reaction was just brilliant!
no subject
Date: 2012-05-22 09:36 pm (UTC)For voting systems the only system where no story can end up with equal numbers of both positive and negative votes is to remove the option of negative votes altogether. So they either get a positive vote or nothing.
Which creates a problem if you get 3 or 4 stories with no votes at the end of voting - because the comm runs to a schedule the only thing to do would be to say all the stories with no votes (or all tied on 1 vote if there are none with zero votes) are out. Which also seems harsh - as then three or four writers are voted out but none of them ever get to find out the reasons why.
Even with a ranked system a writer might get first place from 5 voters, and last place from 6, with some other votes for places in between. So they might end up placing somewhere in the middle once all votes are counted.
A ranked system could also mean a writer who gets second place from everybody ends up winning the round because the writers who got some firsts also got some thirds and fourths as well.
no subject
Date: 2012-05-23 05:57 am (UTC)I can see your point about constructive criticism. I tend to think with these sorts of things you always end up being subjective. I think that's OK because it might be that you can't really think of anything to vote them out on, and in fact it is simply because others used the prompts in a way that appealed to me as a reader more. It may not be that constructive, but at least it's not rude or mean to say that. Plus it's all subjective anyhow.
I think grammar picking etc is almost not worth it. Unless it's blatantly wrong and an easy error to pick up. There was an LAS where a story was voted out that I thought had some really basic grammar errors, it was quite difficult as a read. Anyhow in the feedback post a lot of people jumped in to reassure the writer that they were absolutely correct and quite a row ensued in the comments. (In fact I didn't comment, because I was so scared of the supporters who were insisting this story had perfect grammar) The writer had just been angry at those who voted them out, then went on to get support and more angry. I've seen that a few times even with WIAD, where the writers feel cross about negative feedback and the feedback post gets a bit scary.
Anyhow the main thing is that people feel they are getting something useful out of it, and that it can be enjoyable. I don't think it's worth anyone either feeling they can't carry on, or even ending up cross or upset when voted out. It would taint the whole thing.
I think your point about canon etc is at least a reason for voting that wouldn't upset you. I mean with the memorial service thing, you can shrug that off as a different POV. It does show though how you remember negative comments about things, we all find it difficult. You know it might sound trite but there are cultural issues as well, in the way we express ourselves, different cultures see being blunt as OK, whereas others like to couch everything in long winded politeness. I have German friends who have lived over here who think the British are so odd for always saying please and thankyou, and the long winded way we ask for things etc. They laughed at us thanking the bus driver. Yet i found it was really easy to inadvertently upset them because I didn't get their cultural mores as it were.