Thoughts on anonymized compos
category: general [glöplog]
Quote:
Quote:(and before you say "aha, but if you didn't anonymise the compos then it wouldn't have happened": yes it would, because we re-record entries for many of the compos either way)
Why would you upload re-recorded versions though instead of the original file?
probably because someone took the release-folder of the partymeister installation and shoved it over to scene.org as is... btdt
No I get that, that's a mistake, but if there would be no anonymous releases, there would be no anonymous files near release folders, would it?
Either way it's besides the point, it's really more just an unfortunate symptom of the issue.
Either way it's besides the point, it's really more just an unfortunate symptom of the issue.
Quote:
What I meant to say is that the reason to anonynimize entries would not be so much
to prevent name voting than to prevent nationality voting. That problem is at least worrisome as the original problem the thread starter seeked out to expose. In effect, Eastern European countries
Please.
You can argue that people tend to upvote groups/sceners they had personal contact with and that it is much more likely to have more contacts from your own country and as thus might impact the statistics in this regard.
But do you seriously think people vote positively/negatively on entries because of the nationality of their creators? That would be very, very sad....
Yeah, nationality shouldn't matter, but I just can't bring myself to vote for productions made in Hervanta :(
I have to agree with msqrt.
I have to agree with msqrt.
So, now we've got a Pouet thread about this, and it seems people are sort of in favour of not having anonymized compos. Yay. Mission accomplished?
@Baudsurfer:
Yes, the Eurovision syndrome is well known. But we shouldn't blame the people who got their freedom back quite lately that they have stronger national feelings than us western Europeans. They take those events much more seriously. Eventually this will change there too, I hope. Or worst case, we will become nationalists again too.
IMO, we should accept it as it is. Like we accept that people from the Amiga scene are biased to Amiga prods, Atari sceners prefer Atari prods etc. pp. You cannot change the people by the rules of a compo, the people have to change themselves.
Only unacceptable is, when an organizer tries to influence the votes. They should be strictly neutral.
BTW: I already have a problem with the ordering of the compo entries at Revision. I sure hope there is at least some random element in it. But I would like to see that becoming more transparent for everyone.
Yes, the Eurovision syndrome is well known. But we shouldn't blame the people who got their freedom back quite lately that they have stronger national feelings than us western Europeans. They take those events much more seriously. Eventually this will change there too, I hope. Or worst case, we will become nationalists again too.
IMO, we should accept it as it is. Like we accept that people from the Amiga scene are biased to Amiga prods, Atari sceners prefer Atari prods etc. pp. You cannot change the people by the rules of a compo, the people have to change themselves.
Only unacceptable is, when an organizer tries to influence the votes. They should be strictly neutral.
BTW: I already have a problem with the ordering of the compo entries at Revision. I sure hope there is at least some random element in it. But I would like to see that becoming more transparent for everyone.
If author name is shown, it opens up lots of possibilities for my new and surprising alternate names!
On the other hand, I kind of like people having to guess who made which song or picture, based on the style. It's nice if people are surprised when they find out who the author was.
On the other hand, I kind of like people having to guess who made which song or picture, based on the style. It's nice if people are surprised when they find out who the author was.
Quote:
A short thought that has nothing to do with finding the "most deserved" winners:
For everyone who won't win compos (see: the majority), having their name displayed during their entry is the only recognition they'll get for their work.
Anonymous compo slides rob them of that chance to get a pat on the back when their image is shown, song played or whatever the compo is about.
And no, I don't think showing all the names of the authors for a few seconds after the compo has the same effect.
+1. Anonymised compos would be like making Mario Kart players sit in separate rooms so nobody knows who's who. You lose the social aspect.
Without names shown, there's less excitement and anticipation. You lose these scenarios:
- "Ooh, it's that guy! Excited to hear his new track!"
- "Who's this guy? I don't know what to expect, and that's exciting!"
- "That's my name up there, and people are coming over to me!"
If no names are displayed, it's very difficult to talk about specific tracks afterwards. Names are always shown in demos, so why hide them in other compos?
Also, I can't imagine anonymity affecting the end results significantly.
Quote:
So, now we've got a Pouet thread about this, and it seems people are sort of in favour of not having anonymized compos. Yay. Mission accomplished?
People are just agreeing with me because they saw my name at the end of the post...!!
should we anonymize pouet posts then?
Let´s nationalize competitions! flags instead of handles and group names!
That's the logical next step. Before we come to national pacts. And then open war! :)
The next step shall be anonymized platforms in order to prevent the Amiga syndrome!
Quote:
BTW: I already have a problem with the ordering of the compo entries at Revision. I sure hope there is at least some random element in it. But I would like to see that becoming more transparent for everyone.
Let me say something to this (the random guy who played the 4k-/8k intros/4k gfx at revision).
I usually try to pick an interesting compo order - ending somewhat with a climax (not necessarily the entry which I think will win).
Nobody really ever complained about it and I think doing a completely random entry order would suck for the party experience.
I watch all entries multiple times (it's horrible sometimes) and try to choose the best order possible to make the competition interesting for the audience. There are special positions like the last three entries and the first one - choose them wisely - otherwise you might piss off the audience or else. Just in case I have any doubts about the chosen order I ask someone else from the compo team for input.
The order might have some influence on the voting but I don't think there's much you can do a about it without ruining at least some part of the party experience (e.g. you would kill the awesomeness of having your intro/demo played last in a compo).
I can't say much about how this really works with music compos or other compos with a lot of (anonymized) entries. Publishing the compo order before would make no sense to me at all and someone has to decide some kind of order to play the entries in a nice way.
Ordering music compos can be quite a challenge. Practically everyone I know who has been involved with music preselection tried to create an order that emphasizes variety, to keep the compo interesting. Also, it would probably be unfair to play a quiet and intricate ambient track after your ears have been tired by 5 drum and bass smashers. Imho a good order helps to give all tracks a better chance at getting the attention they deserve. This doesn't have anything to do with the name thing though. Imho the streaming music compo at this years revision was a very good one in that regard.
Perfect opportunity to take this into the preselection debate! I'll fetch some popcorn :D
Perfect opportunity to take this into the preselection debate! I'll fetch some popcorn :D
Quote:
The order might have some influence on the voting but I don't think there's much you can do a about it without ruining at least some part of the party experience (e.g. you would kill the awesomeness of having your intro/demo played last in a compo).
I fully understand you concern and I really appreciate all the effort you put into the (pre)selection.
But I am not asking for a completely randomized order, just something that doesn't bias the audience too much. Everyone can (or should be able to) see the difference between the top ranked entry and any entry finally ranked at e.g. #10. So no reason to change the general order.
But for the top ranked entries, the differences are often quite small. So whether you play an entry e.g. as last or last but one may change the final ranking. People (like me) who trust your expertise or that of the compo organizers as a group, may be influenced. After all, we are all humans.
So what I am suggesting is some minimal randomness (e.g. move around some prods by 1 or 2 positions) based on your carefully selected order. You can much better justify how much negative impact that would have on the party experience than a noob like me. I can only describe my own concerns and leave the decision to people who know better.
BTW: let there be light! was just featured in ZDF heute, while I am writing this. :)
Some thoughts: as many people have said already, group fame is indeed affecting voting. The only question remains, is it so bad? I mean, if a group consistently delivers quality prods, maybe they simply deserve to get extra "brand points"? However, if it's just because they are friends of a voter, but their demo is "so so" at best, then it's not fair. Unfortunately, in the latter case, those friends by definition are well informed which prod they should vote for, so anonymity would not help at all.
it works in the other direction as well:
asd releases a prod that is not as "huge" as lifeforce: insta bashing commences ;p
asd releases a prod that is not as "huge" as lifeforce: insta bashing commences ;p
Quote:
However, if it's just because they are friends of a voter, but their demo is "so so" at best, then it's not fair.
But then they make some non-friends and next time they enter a prod, they get some "oh no, not these guys again" downvotes. As long as namevoting works in both directions, I guess we're safe.
By the way, the Forever voting system (where you score each prod with 0-10 points rather than ranking them) also has a feature that if you give 0 to everyone except 9 to your own (or friend) prod, your votes will not be counted for that compo. That is, "if you want to namevote, at least don't make it too obvious". This opens for some subjectivity from the organizers (what is a reasonable scoring?), however. No system is perfect.
Quote:
By the way, the Forever voting system (where you score each prod with 0-10 points rather than ranking them) also has a feature that if you give 0 to everyone except 9 to your own (or friend) prod, your votes will not be counted for that compo. That is, "if you want to namevote, at least don't make it too obvious".
But even that system could be bastardized... just voting to their friend a 9 and then vote the rest giving more points to the worst prods.
Quote:
But I am not asking for a completely randomized order, just something that doesn't bias the audience too much. Everyone can (or should be able to) see the difference between the top ranked entry and any entry finally ranked at e.g. #10. So no reason to change the general order.
The order of a compo show is made out in order to provide the best possible entertainment possible for the audience. Generally that's being done by putting the highlights at the end, ending on a high note.
Quote:
But for the top ranked entries, the differences are often quite small. So whether you play an entry e.g. as last or last but one may change the final ranking. People (like me) who trust your expertise or that of the compo organizers as a group, may be influenced. After all, we are all humans.
They are quite small indeed! The PC 64k compos at Revision for 2015 and 2016 are great examples:
I think most people will agree that the Conspiracy vs Mercury battles these years have provided us with intros of exceptional qualities, where it's close to impossible to choose a favorite. So with the race being that close you would think that the order would be what's tipping the scales, right?
However, in 2015 the top 3 places were the reverse order of the compo show (Conspiracy played third to last and won, Mercury played second to last and placed second and Approximate played last and placed third). This year, Conspiracy was played last and placed second, while Mercury was played second to last and won.
If anything, you would think that being played last is a disadvantage. Or that the order means less than you think for the eventual outcome of the compo.
Quote:
Ordering music compos can be quite a challenge. Practically everyone I know who has been involved with music preselection tried to create an order that emphasizes variety, to keep the compo interesting. Also, it would probably be unfair to play a quiet and intricate ambient track after your ears have been tired by 5 drum and bass smashers. Imho a good order helps to give all tracks a better chance at getting the attention they deserve. This doesn't have anything to do with the name thing though. Imho the streaming music compo at this years revision was a very good one in that regard.:D
I agree, it was very thoughtfully put together (congratulations to whoever did that :).
Generally when I order playlists for music competitions I try to factor in production quality (does it sound good?), songwriting (interesting ideas? Well structured?) and intensity/energy level. As you said, playing ambient right after a massively intense club track will probably not work great. But if you can put another track in between those two that makes the shift a bit less abrupt, you can still play low intensity stuff late in a compo and make it work.
I usually try to make out two "intensity peaks" in the playlist for a compo if I have the material for it. It helps keeps the audience interested, and also refreshes their senses a bit. If you sort only by intensity (low to high), the last five tracks will probably all be a bit of a blur to the audience because there is no contrast. If you punch someone in the face it will hurt. If you do it 30 times in a row they'll be numb, and not appreciate the 30th punch as much as the first.
Quote:
The order of a compo show is made out in order to provide the best possible entertainment possible for the audience.
and thats how it should be really .... i remember a few years ago at X the demo compo a) had quite a bunch of entries and b) the order was completely random. that was NOT cool.
Quote:
as many people have said already, group fame is indeed affecting voting. The only question remains, is it so bad? I mean, if a group consistently delivers quality prods, maybe they simply deserve to get extra "brand points"?.
Yeah a lot of people have spoken about name-voting for a very long time but I am not so sure it is voting for "name" only but more due to the fact certain groups consistently produce top quality work which is justifiably voted for.
As evidence against name voting I would point to the recent Farbrausch releases, arguably one of the most known and respected names in PC demos and producers of some of the most popular demos of all time. Yet people so seem to be voting whether they enjoy the demo and not the name alone. Also recently some groups had great success at Assembly last year, were awarded with Meteoriks and yet ranked surprisingly low at Revision. This seems to prove each release is being voted on its merits and not based on prior work released by that group.
You will never remove biases from human behaviour but I am not convinced that name-voting is the big issue that some people say it is.
