Need input from LB community on Voting Rules

[X]

There have been a number of different voting rules implementing on LB throughout the years by different admins and mods. As I'm preparing to reboot the moderator program, I would like to come up with a final set of voting rules with input from the community. Since there are a lot of opinions on this, I think it's fair to hear from everyone.

The rules should define what constitutes a proper vote, and what grounds a vote could be removed on.

Please post your suggested rules and we'll come up with the list together, and have it published clearly on the battle page when you vote so there is no confusion.

[Brayne Ded]

People need to actually BE VOTING before I think it's time to worry about enforcing new rules on it.

[Erupt da Monsta]

Voting rules should be as follows imo:

What ive found on various sites that ive been on. Votes are usually based on criteria such as a list of categories....

1. Multis
2. Punches
3. Metaphors
4. Personals
5.Execution/Swag

This allows for a voter for one that cant actually understand or grasp the entire concept of voting to understand how to break it down. Also it gives the battler a better understanding of what it is that he or she should work on....

I had a rap school awhile back that helped people learn these tech. and also a chance to showcase their skills ... i might bring it back simply to help

[Punk]

This can be settled with a simple ass touch... Make vote comments a minimum of 150 or 200 characters. That’s enough space to completely abolish the “fv vb” “one was better” type votes. I feel this will be perfect.

[Denton]

This can be settled with a simple ass touch... Make vote comments a minimum of 150 or 200 characters. That’s enough space to completely abolish the “fv vb” “one was better” type votes. I feel this will be perfect.

+1

[Azul El Chivo]

^ Said that for years and years don't know why it still hasn't happened. Oh yeah, muhfuckas are stupid, nvm.

[joan of arc]

i think we need to see an example of them "proving" they read the battle. on a previous site, they had people say what there favorite line was. so to put it in the context of lb, it *could be required to recite what you thought was botb=bar of the battle.

i also think the "punches,metaphors,wordplay" skills need to be updated. there was talks of making a sliding scale, which would allow us to rate faster, and if we had things like, PUNCHES, EXECUTION, and SKILL i think that'd be better.

[Azul El Chivo]

No. ^

[Óðinn]

Like both, Punk & Erupt previously stated.

Have a basic minimum character limit and also create a system/voting structure based on certain categories. The current ones we have, even if they're on a battle, the chances are that no one uses them. If we have it so that you must select from 1-5 on each categorie (Meta's, Mulits, Personals, etc).. before the vote can be cast could be a good touch.

Maybe also have that show up in each individual vote too, so each battler can see what they were rated on each particular skill set by a voter under the main vote.

Example:
Erupt: Punk had the more coherent bars here. I feel... etc etc
X: 7 vs Punk: 8
X: Metas 3, Punk: Metas 4,
Multis 4, Multis 4,
Punches 4, Punches 5,

^Not perfect but you get the idea. :high:

[Punk]

Tbh I hate the categories system. Idk if it’s just me or what but I tend to not even wanna be bothered voting when I gotta click 30 drop down boxes for a rate when I’ve basically typed out my feelings about both dude’s bars in the comment section already.

Voting needs to be nice and simple. None of the extra shit. As much shit we talk in the forums, Legit no one would have a problem typing like 2-3 sentences of feedback and tapping that vote button.

[REZN]

There are a few potential fixes in regard to voting.

1.) Removing the rating system(1-10) alleviates the amount of complaints about "unfair" votes, based on the bias of the perception of one's skill. A simple thumbs up on the winner's side will cut these types of complaints, probably by half or more(in my opinion.)

2.) A character limit. Another of the biggest complaints is the use of "fv vb" or other similarly non-explained votes. 150 character minimum alleviates this in part, as it forces people to explain their rationale(and makes those who aren't much easier to find.)

3.) In regard to "rules," for voting, this is a more difficult question to approach. Because you can't really tell a person what to think, or how to feel about a battle. You can define some aspects which should be prioritized. Such as requiring a critical explanation of your vote. But, outside of that, voting is subjective. And people will vote for battles based on different factors. The RULES I would put into place, are as follows(and freankly, similar to the current)

3a.) All votes must be explained via the comments section critically and respectfully.

3b.) Members of the same crew cannot vote on each other's battles.

3c.) Voting links may only be shared in the allotted threads(this has the capacity to limit the notion of "buddy voting.)

And those are the only three strict rules I would enforce in regard to voting. That's it. Voting's not difficult. Restricting it too much has the potential of being counterproductive to the goal of facilitating it.

[X]

The minimum character is a good idea and easy to implement

If the multiple skill rating system was easier to use (e.g a bunch of sliders instead of dropdowns) would it make sense to keep?

[REZN]

The minimum character is a good idea and easy to implement

If the multiple skill rating system was easier to use (e.g a bunch of sliders instead of dropdowns) would it make sense to keep?

Not to me, personally. But, I think others would probably argue that it would. To me, the rating of the verse is less important(to the point of being unnecessary), than the feedback a person is giving to the battler. It doesn't really add to the vote in any capacity, aside from creating an additional layer of subjectivity to the vote itself, which is the biggest factor in the aforementioned complaints of bias, and "unfair" judgement. I think I should be rated highly in every battle, and others do too I'm sure. But, my perception varies from others' about my level of skill, and vice versa.

[Saii]

The problem with the category system is that it's

A) inactive

and B) an imperfect platform in the sense that it gives someone the power to sway someone's skill set on their profile. As long as that system has been implemented, I've never heard of a user complaining about their skill rankings because they have no way of knowing who rated them what. What if someone decides one day to rank Shodan a 1 in the multie category? Now his skillset on his profile is all fucked up because someone decided to be petty.

If you're going to keep that system, you MUST implement a system within the system so we at least know who is ranking what, like Punk suggested. If you're not going to make the system fair then remove it.

---------- Post added at 03:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:30 PM ----------

Also, the character limit should be 75. 150 is a mini paragraph. I understand wanting to drive home the idea of explaining your votes but 150 might be a bit excessive. Not everybody wants to type a paragraph every single time they vote. A simple sentence or two explaining why someone voted the way they did should be good enough.

[Punk]

The problem with the category system is that it's

A) inactive

and B) an imperfect platform in the sense that it gives someone the power to sway someone's skill set on their profile. As long as that system has been implemented, I've never heard of a user complaining about their skill rankings because they have no way of knowing who rated them what. What if someone decides one day to rank Shodan a 1 in the multie category? Now his skillset on his profile is all fucked up because someone decided to be petty.

If you're going to keep that system, you MUST implement a system within the system so we at least know who is ranking what, like Punk suggested. If you're not going to make the system fair then remove it.

---------- Post added at 03:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:30 PM ----------

Also, the character limit should be 75. 150 is a mini paragraph. I understand wanting to drive home the idea of explaining your votes but 150 might be a bit excessive. Not everybody wants to type a paragraph every single time they vote. A simple sentence or two explaining why someone voted the way they did should be good enough.


“Also, the character limit should be 75. 150 is a mini paragraph. I understand wanting to drive home the idea of explaining your votes but 150 might be”

^ thats 150 characters. Where and how is that excessive at all? That’s not even a paragraph bruh.

[REZN]

>A simple sentence or two

>150 characters is literally a simple sentence or two

[Denton]

Well whatever you do, implement it sometime this decade, 2020 around the corner

[Saii]

“Also, the character limit should be 75. 150 is a mini paragraph. I understand wanting to drive home the idea of explaining your votes but 150 might be”

^ thats 150 characters. Where and how is that excessive at all? That’s not even a paragraph bruh.

Oh fr? Lol I figured it was around 80 or some shit. But touche. Either way, I agree with the general idea. Character restriction is a +

[Erupt da Monsta]

I think a character limit is a good medium , and would make a categories like personals Multis etc null so as long as there is a limit for characters used in a vote, that’s good enough. When you think about it making it too complicated would be counterproductive as wretched pointed out, so yeah
A character limit on votes would be ideal and a good medium

As for removing the 1-10 rating system that would then affect the hotlist and other ratings that are on profiles etc. not sure how easy it would be or if so then the hotlist would have to be simply about how many votes rather than how high the battle is ranked.

So there’s a few ways to do this. I agree voting on categories would be extra work, but a character limit would be ideal.

[The Saaxxx Baba]

doesn't matter how you tweak it there are always gonna be those few and most times majority of voters who think they all time greats while voting and will give you a 4 or 5 no matter how good your verse was, something should be done about those rating biases as well.

---------- Post added at 03:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:50 PM ----------

also, in my 6 months here, i have had about 80 battles overall and voted in about 350 battles (audios and texts included) which is almost an average of more than 50 votes per month. i say thats something which needs to be considered as well coz there are folks who just battle and expect votes but never vote themselves in the first place.

[X]

Added minimum 100 character comment requirement to voting

[The Saaxxx Baba]

Added minimum 100 character comment requirement to voting

thanks X and Punk !! seems like a good idea to begin with.

[Shodan]

I'm going to throw out a really simple and cover-all definition that doesn't need long criteria or formulas or whatever.

For a vote to not be removed, it should have to demonstrate that you actually read the battle.

Shit like "gb fv" is not acceptable because it doesn't show that the voter even looked at the battle. If someone says things like, "I liked bar X" or "I thought Battler A's long scheme was dope" (if Battler A actually had a long scheme), then the vote can be allowed to stand.

As for biased votes or bad judgments based on ignorance, I think they should only be removed in blatant cases, and only after multiple moderators agree. The exception to the multiple moderator consensus rule would be when people outright admit to dropping hate votes/dickriding/not reading/etc.

---------- Post added at 12:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:32 PM ----------

Oh fr? Lol I figured it was around 80 or some shit. But touche. Either way, I agree with the general idea. Character restriction is a +

lmao I think you were low-key confusing characters with words