ThinkDraw

Just a few first thoughts on everything that has been written here about the Top 5 system:

1. Sorry this is being posted in a new topic, it is just because there are now so many topics on this subject.

2. All your suggestions are welcome and are being read and considered.

3. One problem with 'most ratings' is it presents a less fair comparison for pictures done on the 1st and 31st of the month.

4. Another possible solution is to raise the minimum number of votes required and make it vary between themes.

5. We will test the 'weighted average' formula suggested by anotherronism before releasing the next Top 5.

6. Apologies to those who missed out this month, but each and every picture on that page is wonderful and deserves to be there.

ThinkDraw

Thanks again for all your feedback on this, and we hope to be able to improve the system in future.

matthew

As long as you care, see what our issue is & are trying I am good...

Thanks

lilmiss

i have an idea.... Why not allow all of us to enter 1 of our own pics into top 5...and whoever enters a pic into the the showcase is linked to all showcase pics and then we vote/rate them there. Keep the ratings where they are and not have any impact on the showcase vote. That way we know it is a serious vote and the only people that will be able to vote are those that entered a pic and everybodys pic will get equal public display.

marg

ThinkDraw (Rachel et al)..

I think you're incredible - you're interested, responsive and come up with some fantastic improvements.

I'll probably keep complaining about something or other, but my main thought is : THANK YOU

anotherronism

Thanks for the shout out. I had changed my mind on that formula with the idea of vote-no vote but what you say is true. Pics submitted at the end of the month wouldn't stand a chance. Who'd've thunk this could get so complicated. Argh! Thanks for listening.

anotherronism

Hey Thinkdraw.

I should've done this before I suggested that formula. But I just tested it myself on 4 hypothetical pics.

A: 4 5's
B: 6 5's
C: 7 5's & 1 4
D: 10 5's and 1 1

Assuming a minimum vote count of 2 the results work out to this:
A: 4.942528736
B: 4.956896552
C: 4.865517241
D: 4.665782493

The single 4 for C and the single 1 for D still kill them both.

Even with 1,000,000 5's and that single 1 D still looses.

And at a billion 5's the best D can do is tie (and this is a rounding error).

Sorry - but this method will not work to solve the problems of the perfect score with a single negative vote. And I think that's the problem. A single 5 will always outweigh anything else that is itself not perfect.

Remember the old ice-skating scoring in the olympics? The would throw out the low and the high and average the middle numbers.

For really large vote getters you could even throw out more than one on each side.

I'm sorry I didn't test this formula before I submitted it.

Good luck.

BTW: Someone went through my gallery today and gave me a 4 on every picture with more than 9 votes thereby pushing me out of the Top Rated in the gallery for good. Even my Top 5 picture is now on the last page of my own gallery. If this isn'r proof of malice I don't know what is.

Thanks for all your support. We LOVE this site!

anotherronism

Here's an idea.

Vote No-Vote or even total vote count. Either would fail, as you say, for entries received near the end of the month.

But what if it weren't PER MONTH. What if it was a rolling value for the past, say, 30 days? Then the top 5 would change daily as old stuff moved off the line and new stuff moved on. If I posted today I'd have just as much chance of making it in anytime during the next 30 days.

No blitzing.

A negative vote actually HELPS the user get honored.

The blitzers would have no reason to blitz so the Gallery Top scores would (should) remain valid.

This is the very best idea I can come up with.

Good luck with all this.

Ron

Soda

Hmm... A formula would work but you would have to some how also take into account that the lower voted pictures....

mmm

Now you have me thinking Anotherronism....

However if we do a roll over top 5 I think it would be better for lets say weekly... it would honor more people however for those that don't come on everyday it would still be able to be seen.

(I'll think on the formula ....even if I hate math :p )

anotherronism

I like the idea of a week-long roll-up but I think a 30-day roll would more fairly reflect the current system while eliminating almost all of the current problems.

Thinkdraw: I really, really think this might be THE idea.

For past honors you could select any date or week to display the roll snapshot for that time. So people would stay in the Top 5 for when they were there but would roll off the conveyor for current Top 5 when their time was up. (Their crystal will be clear at 30 - Time for Carousel! Oh my God! I just made a Logan's Run reference. I'm a nerd! I'm a nerd! Help me!)

Soda

mmm that would work too... though that would add a lot more pages....


but in regards to the formula....

So the problem seems that though this is the weighted rating it does not take into account the problem that 1 vote of 5 is better then 10 votes of 5 and 1 vote of 4


weighted rating (WR) = (v ÷ (v+m)) × R + (m ÷ (v+m)) × C

So what we would need to do is add another portion to this formula.


This portion would give a slightly negative affect to the lower votes then to the higher votes

what if it looked slightly like this...
(please correct if you see something wrong with it. I am not the person to come to for help with math homework ... I only like puzzles and problem solving)

altered weighted rating (WR) = (v ÷ (v+m)) × R + (m ÷ (v+m)) × C + (n)

Though I am not sure if n is the best/only thing that should go there...

n would equal this:

1 vote = -1
2 votes = -.9
3 votes = -.8
4 votes = -.7
5 votes = -.6
6 votes = -.5
7 votes = -.4
8 votes = -.3
9 votes = -.2
10 votes = -.1
11 votes = 0
12 votes = 0? or .1


nor do I know how to mathimatically place this into a formula at this time.

I am not quiet sure however if this would compensate enough for the problem. Since I believe even with that it would still get killed for a one vote of 1.

So maybe the values would have to be bigger... or increase differently.

candr

I know this goes against the norm of having anonymity in voting, but isn't there some way for ThinkDraw to KNOW who's doing the unethical voting? I mean a 1 vote on an outstanding pic would be obvious (I'm not sure if this is still an issue since it's been discovered a 4 vote can knock someone out). But also someone coming in and 4-voting every highly rated pic in your gallery would be obvious. Just a thought...

matthew

...They are doing everything can & then some... Eventually it will all be fixed and we can stop sparring & spatting & have more fun...

...Personally if I knew what 10 people gave me a 1 vote on my Eye of the Tiger... I would crush every pic they did...

...Vindictive... Yes I am... Wish that was my worst flaw in life...

...I will answer for my sins one day... Would be nice if the worst God says to me is...

... "Oh my ME!" (He wouldn't say Oh my God), "you sure have a vindictive streak about you. You sure are lucky for the grace of me."

Soda

I know they are doing everything they can and for that I am extremely grateful!... I am... I don't want it to be said that I do not think Think Draw... I think what they have made is amazing...

Anyway I think that if a few people were moderators... but idk how that would work out....


Anyway... I hope the addition to the formula will help out....

MugDots2

Not sure what all has been suggested but I'll throw these out there.

Idea # 1: Just allow us to mark an image thumbs up or thumbs down, but only count the thumbs up. Whoever has the most thumbs up wins. No one can sabotage you. A negative vote is the same as not voting. I don't think most people actually assign a rating based on value, anyway. (1 - 5)

Idea #2: If we continue to use the ratings 1 - 5, assign values with big differences between them, so if someone does sabotage you, it doesn't make a huge difference in your score. 1 = 1, 2 = 20, 3 = 40, 4 = 80, 5 = 200. Surely there wouldn't be more than 1 or 2 mean spirited folks out there.

anotherronism

MugDots:

Your Idea #1: Kills all people submitting at the end of the month as they don't have the same time to accumulate votes.

Your idea #2: Even in an aggressively geometric grading such as you suggest you would still get five five's beating a million fives and a single four.

Seriously...

5x5-25; divided by 5 equals 5
1,000,000X5 = 5,000,000 + 4 = 5,000,004; divided by 1,000,001 = 4.99999

The 1st still beats the 2nd even with a MILLION FIVE VOTES!

I strongly think a straight vote count with a rolling 30-day tally would be best.

anotherronism

Sorry. That was messed up.

Five 5's:
5x200=1000: Average: 1000/5=200
1000000x200=200,000,000+4=200,000,004: Average: 200,000,004/1,000,001=199.9998

Case 1: Five 5's beats out Case 2: 1,000,000 5's and a single 4

anotherronism

Sorry. That was messed up too.

I'll get this right...

Case 1: Five 5's:
5x200=1000:
Average: 1000/5=200

Case 2: One Million 5's and a single 4:
1,000,000x200=200,000,000+4=200,000,004:
Average: 200,000,004/1,000,001=199.9998

Case 1: Five 5's beats out Case 2: 1,000,000 5's and a single 4
Score: 200 to 199.99998

MugDots2

Thanks for doing the math; I did not want to think that much to see if it would work.

MugDots2

Wait, why do you have to do the division part. Why can't you just add up the points and most points wins?