Restructuring the Moderator voting criteria?
 

There's been a persistent problem in the structure of the way in which we expect moderators to vote on battles.(Not in how they vote, or who they vote for. But, in what battles they're voting on.)

Battles sometimes remain open days after they're scheduled to end because of a lack of votes. And this has been a continual problem for a considerable period of time. A method previously used to mend this problem was the fair voter's club, but, this is a flawed system, as this type of issue is exactly what moderators are for, in conjunction with their technical duties.

Because of this, we should restructure the way in which we expect moderators to vote. By placing their predominant focus on battles both on the closing soon list, and the recent battles list(that aren't hotlisted.), assuring that these battles all get the minimum required number of votes to be closed.


What do you guys think?

---------- Post added at 07:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:41 AM ----------

Additionally, perhaps using a voting quota per month for moderators is an additional step to aiding this issue.

Voting quotas never work, but yeah I always voted on battles ending soon first.

I think it depends on the size of the quota, and the individual it's assigned to. I mean, if you're really willing to help, to the point that you've gotten a moderator spot, a mandatory 20 battles a month should be nothing.

I think I should be given some sort of title and I'll vote on every battle for awhile.. Pay me..

i try to vote like this and pay attention to whats closing but Ill admit I could be better at it....part of the issue is til the past week we haven't seen most of the mods on a consistent basis. Whether it be the prior direction of things, real life obligations or whatever, we all havent been around as much.

20 battles a month? That's not too much to ask at all.

Give me a fucking title..

5 mods. 20 battles a month. That's 100 battles a month. 150 if you make it 30 battles. That's almost every battle a month(maybe more than every battle) with the current activity getting enough votes to hotlist.

https://www.letsbeef.com/battle_deta...n=tb&id=496322

---------- Post added at 10:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:48 AM ----------

Hotlist that..

---------- Post added at 10:56 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:49 AM ----------

I want my title to say "Fuck Your Vote"

You typed a lot of unnecessary shit lol. Most recent / ending soon should be priority, agreed.

TL;DR Vote on shit cause it helps

We could also look at resetting the credit system for some users to encourage more voting..

^^ Also a good idea.

Edit:

Better yet, all users, monthly.

@Rant has the right answer with


Scrap the credits as currency junk because it isn't any good and do this. I've actually wanted this for a long time and I think I even asked you about it at some point. The system, from my understanding, isn't set up to where this can be done automatically right now but I would assume a manual reset each month wouldn't take too much time.

That's def. a good idea but I can see some people being discouraged to use the site because of it. Or just dropping shitty votes to get credits.

Maybe this helps us decide, active in past month..

155 people have less than 10 credits
149 people have between 10 and 20 credits
76 people have more than 20 credits

We could reset monthly, that makes sense to me, but maybe reset to 4 credits so everyone can at least start a battle and join a battle?

Good compromise. I like the idea of still being able to respond to, or post a battle once the reset occurs.

Rewards, such as emcee items and Exclusive membership, purchasable with purged credits, might be a good idea. For example, if you had 79 credits when the reset occured, you would afterwards have 4 credits remaining and 75 to spend.

This system would encourage voting while preventing excessive accumulation of useless credits and the negative consequences of that.

Shit there goes my 10,000 credits lol

"Voted: 38 audio / 253 text"

?????

Ouch. I guess I've still been stuck in the old mindset. Remembering when people were hoarding hundreds and hundreds of points at a time. That's almost 400 active users and very few credits. That kind of puts a different skew on the whole thing.


Also, is there any way you could be talked into sharing the statistical data in a spreadsheet to those of us with access to the staff section? The nerd in me wants to crunch numbers and look for trends.

@X and @Rant ... I dont think resetting the credit system is a great idea. I have 200+ credits and still vote when I log on. I would log on less if you took my credits away, maybe if you took away a percentage or left us with a certain minimal amount (so all those over 20 get left with 20).... I dunno. Otherwise at least let me exchange them useless shits for something... @Row is there still a system in place for credit exchange?

no idea that was implemented by pugz, and i dont have the power to tend to that so that question is for X

Not unreasonable at all....other sites require 2 recent voting links to battle one time. you should have to be active voting if you are an active battler. Idk how easy it is to check each individual each month but if people hit certain benchmarks each month (20+,50+100+) maybe it could earn an award or something to take the sting outta watching 100 credits turn to 4 on the first of the month.

Almost 400 active members? You can bet maybe 50 earned any of those credits in the past month.

Resetting the credits monthly is definitely the most logical thing to do. Who gives a fuck if you lose the amount credits. Want to battle? Vote.

You're next.

Gave myself 10K at one point

dat admin abuse though

Fixed :cool:

and i thought i was foul for rewarding myself 500 lol..

^ Cool idea