Difference between revisions of "User talk:Thraxian/Proposals/Voting"
From #openttdcoop wiki
(thoughts about voting proposal) |
m (→Responses to tneo's thoughts) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Some nice ideas here, just some thoughts: | Some nice ideas here, just some thoughts: | ||
* How long would you let the planning be open, or in which year would games start? | * How long would you let the planning be open, or in which year would games start? | ||
| + | <div style="color:green"> | ||
| + | :The timeline for voting (when to start, when to close) would have to be determined. The point I'm making is that there should be a ''well-defined'' window for voting which leaves ample time for designs to be submitted and reviewed, and ample time for people to have a chance to cast a vote. One alternate solution would be for an admin to pause the game when voting commences, thereby freezing any additional development. The vote would run while the game is paused (signs can still be placed), and the game would be unpaused at the end of voting. This pausing would prevent modification of submitted plan layouts, but would prevent new plans from being submitted during voting, and would cause a reduction in available MM funds at the end of the vote. | ||
| + | </div> | ||
* I don't like the idea of a fixed game setting for "maglev" only, that limits the possible plans to be made and who determines that? | * I don't like the idea of a fixed game setting for "maglev" only, that limits the possible plans to be made and who determines that? | ||
| + | <div style="color:green"> | ||
| + | :Fixed game settings would be decided upon during the previous map. If there is a general consensus (vote) to plan the next map around a specific setting/goal (pax only, specific trains, tform rules, etc.), then those settings can be applied. Generally, these fixed settings would be to force variation in game styles and allow those that have been playing recent games to have a specific impact on upcoming maps. | ||
| + | </div> | ||
* What do you plan to include more people to add a plan, it might happen that people get discouraged by not being chosen and not submit a plan anymore. Recently only a handfull of people add a plan and often that are the same players. I can't believe that they are the only ones creative enough to build a plan. | * What do you plan to include more people to add a plan, it might happen that people get discouraged by not being chosen and not submit a plan anymore. Recently only a handfull of people add a plan and often that are the same players. I can't believe that they are the only ones creative enough to build a plan. | ||
| + | <div style="color:green"> | ||
| + | :I'm not certain I understand your thought here. Could you explain it in another way? My proposal does include steps to ensure that a varied selection of authors are chosen, by allowing ties to be resolved by giving extra votes to the new author. Many regular plan creators will know what works and how to best express it in their plan, leading to their plans being frequently selected. With practice, any player can create a well-designed and easy to understand plan that has the potential for success. | ||
| + | </div> | ||
* Will voting not be allowed until a certain year, so that voting is open after gameyear 1970? | * Will voting not be allowed until a certain year, so that voting is open after gameyear 1970? | ||
| − | * I like the idea of voting with Borda count, that makes it more "honoust". You know can only have one vote and as soon as you see the list of voters grow, you might not add your vote, because the plan you pick is never going to catch up. --[[User:Tneo|Tneo]] 17:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC) | + | <div style="color:green"> |
| + | :Again, the timeline would have to be determined. Deciding factors will include how much time is needed to construct plans and how much time should be allowed for voting. Too long, and players have to leave before building starts. Too short, and players won't have the opportunity to plan or vote. | ||
| + | </div> | ||
| + | * I like the idea of voting with Borda count, that makes it more "honoust". You know can only have one vote and as soon as you see the list of voters grow, you might not add your vote, because the plan you pick is never going to catch up. | ||
| + | <div style="color:green"> | ||
| + | :Thanks for the approval. Often, I find myself choosing between multiple plans that I favor. Borda voting allows me to cast votes for all of the plans I favor. It also ensures that the selected plan is generally preferred by everyone. | ||
| + | </div> | ||
| + | --[[User:Tneo|Tneo]] 17:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC) | ||
| + | <div style="color:green"> | ||
| + | :--[[User:Thraxian|Thraxian]] 22:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)</div> | ||
Latest revision as of 22:47, 18 March 2008
Some nice ideas here, just some thoughts:
- How long would you let the planning be open, or in which year would games start?
- The timeline for voting (when to start, when to close) would have to be determined. The point I'm making is that there should be a well-defined window for voting which leaves ample time for designs to be submitted and reviewed, and ample time for people to have a chance to cast a vote. One alternate solution would be for an admin to pause the game when voting commences, thereby freezing any additional development. The vote would run while the game is paused (signs can still be placed), and the game would be unpaused at the end of voting. This pausing would prevent modification of submitted plan layouts, but would prevent new plans from being submitted during voting, and would cause a reduction in available MM funds at the end of the vote.
- I don't like the idea of a fixed game setting for "maglev" only, that limits the possible plans to be made and who determines that?
- Fixed game settings would be decided upon during the previous map. If there is a general consensus (vote) to plan the next map around a specific setting/goal (pax only, specific trains, tform rules, etc.), then those settings can be applied. Generally, these fixed settings would be to force variation in game styles and allow those that have been playing recent games to have a specific impact on upcoming maps.
- What do you plan to include more people to add a plan, it might happen that people get discouraged by not being chosen and not submit a plan anymore. Recently only a handfull of people add a plan and often that are the same players. I can't believe that they are the only ones creative enough to build a plan.
- I'm not certain I understand your thought here. Could you explain it in another way? My proposal does include steps to ensure that a varied selection of authors are chosen, by allowing ties to be resolved by giving extra votes to the new author. Many regular plan creators will know what works and how to best express it in their plan, leading to their plans being frequently selected. With practice, any player can create a well-designed and easy to understand plan that has the potential for success.
- Will voting not be allowed until a certain year, so that voting is open after gameyear 1970?
- Again, the timeline would have to be determined. Deciding factors will include how much time is needed to construct plans and how much time should be allowed for voting. Too long, and players have to leave before building starts. Too short, and players won't have the opportunity to plan or vote.
- I like the idea of voting with Borda count, that makes it more "honoust". You know can only have one vote and as soon as you see the list of voters grow, you might not add your vote, because the plan you pick is never going to catch up.
- Thanks for the approval. Often, I find myself choosing between multiple plans that I favor. Borda voting allows me to cast votes for all of the plans I favor. It also ensures that the selected plan is generally preferred by everyone.
--Tneo 17:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
- --Thraxian 22:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
