No, this is not a good idea. There’s no reason to disqualify submitters from voting, and it wouldn’t have any appreciable effect on vote collusion. Instead of 20 people conspiring, it would simply mean 19 people conspiring. And it also wouldn’t do anything to stop illegal alts.

In other words, this adds nothing of value to the process.

I think the best solution I’ve heard is remove the “-5 removes the sub” bit

handofg0d Posted:

Check out this “wild” idea.

Remove the “down” vote option. Only options are “Pbum” and “Upvote”.

Whoever has the highest score…wins! It’s amazing.

Sounds too complicated to work and/or implement.

handofg0d Posted:

Sounds too complicated to work and/or implement.

Sounds more like there’s no way to make a distinction between “meh” and “do not like”. As the system is now, there’s 3 levels of vote; +1, -1 and 0. If you take away -1 then you weaken the net effect of each voter on the relative scores.

Maybe that’d be a good thing, but I think I’d rather see the relative effect stay as it is, and just have the negative scores uncapped. The problem right now is that subs can be -5ed within minutes of voting opening, so that the majority of voters never get to see them or vote for them. If you just don’t remove them then even if there’s a mbum-downvote the rest of the itembuildr players can redress the balance.

handofg0d Posted:

If theres only a positive and a pbum vote option, there will only be votes for the ones that are good, no votes if they aren’t good. If something is obviously terrible it will just stay at 0.

There’s two caveats to that. 1) You bumume people vote for good subs, and 2) There are no spam entries.

For some people, there’s nothing funnier than successfully trolling a bunch of other people with a low cost prank. itembuildr has shown time and again that there is a dedicated bloc of these people, but the threat of their trolling is neutralized by killing their entries earlier on, thus limiting the potential exposure.

If entries are pruned, that limits the ability for these people to troll. The worst they can do is downvote an entry they don’t want to win, which does nothing if there are no entries they want to win left.

There’s usually 50 voters who participate in a typical itembuildr round, and in the first couple hours about 8 people vote, enough to kill off the spam entries early on. If those spam entries never die, and instead go the whole 12 hours of voting, they’re more likely to win than if they were eliminated at the start.

The only real problem I have with itembuildr is that it biases against truly creative entries. One could make an item that is legitimately funny to a general audience, but it’ll get downvoted for any number of reasons – jealousy, competition, or simply not finding it funny. To win, one has to appease the voters, so the entries converge on more mediocre submissions. Some good ones get by, but it’s not the norm.

handofg0d Posted:

As far as the spam – shrug, moderation? I mean, how hard would it be for a mod to look through a list of submissions every other day and clear off the spam?

p sure I asked for this ability but was never given it.

Mods can see who made submissions, though (at least if they aren’t downvoted out before they saw it). So they could set up “no spamming” rules and throw Phineas at it for consistency. Then they could ban people who submit ****. But unless ET codes “remove this entry” capability for mods, it still means finding an admin to do it. And with only ET being the admin, that’s probably asking too much Log in to see images!