Transparent Voting

  • Idea
  • Updated 5 years ago
  • Under Consideration
There was a thread a while back about this at http://getsatisfaction.com/artwiculat... but I wanted to make this a bit more visible as things have changed recently.

The Artwiculate web site now allows you to authenticate with Twitter but this seems to only let you:
  1. Delete incorrect entries
  2. Easily access to your profile


I would like to request that voting requires an authentication in this manner.

I know that several people are voting for themselves multiple times to get better "results" and the creation of multiple Twitter accounts would allow this to continue to happen.

However, after voting is closed and the entry's scores are revealed, could we also reveal the voters?

For example, an entry might look like:

82pts This is a really clever entry
RT x 5; Votes @abc @def @ghi

This way, everyone can see if people are fake voting up their tweets or if real players are involved in high scoring tweets.

It's an unfortunate reality that people (who should really just get a life) will self-vote their own entries right up into the top 20 - or recently even top 5 and winner spots!

Regular players will soon recognise a plethora of made-up voters appearing under these "winners" and hopefully the cheater will give up.

What are people's thoughts?

Thanks
~ Michael
Photo of Michael W

Michael W

  • 48 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
  • curious and hopeful

Posted 5 years ago

  • 7
Photo of Michael W

Michael W

  • 48 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
I'm just asking the road builder to install some speed cameras and that we can see the film every now and then :-)
Photo of Silia J. Hatzi

Silia J. Hatzi

  • 46 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
And I agree with & like your idea, Michael, because it enables the other players to learn who they should be honking at if they are so inclined ;-)

I am not much of a honker myself, albeit in the case of intoxicated drivers I inform the authorities. But there seems to be a lot of indiscriminate honking so I am hoping your suggestion of our seeing the camera footage now & then will cut down on the cacophony by reducing the honking to its being directed to the occasional poor driver instead of to the general public :-)
Photo of Miranda Joubioux

Miranda Joubioux

  • 40 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
I would be much happier with random transparency.

This said, I'm not actually convinced that there is that much cheating. Some people have made this game more of a passtime than others and the way the votes fall does seem to reflect this. Others are in contact with many people who do not even play the game as such, but that doesn't prevent them from RTing or voting. This is what makes Artwiculate so convoluted!

What I really regret is the loss of good tweeters, who left because of the negative atmosphere on Artwiculate. It is sometimes very difficult to distance oneself from peoples remarks. The written word can be much harder to take than the spoken one, and I feel that people should be mindful of this. If we spend less time talking about how Artwiculate works between ourselves and putting our constructive remarks here, then everyone should get the best out of this game.

It is so easy to accuse...
but it is very unpleasant to be the brunt of false accusations.

If Michael's idea can prevent some of these bad feelings then I'll be happy to back random speed cameras!
Photo of Michael W

Michael W

  • 48 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
Thanks again everyone for contributing to the discussion. And a special thanks to those who have been constructive and polite :)

I think we have a general consensus that the problems affecting both the scoring and the perception of the scoring could be reduced with transparent voting.

However, this could introduce problems with social behaviour and bring a pressure to vote on every entry every day, lest we upset others that vote for us.

One suggestion I had above was to randomly reveal the voting composition. I had a couple of other similar suggestions that might be easier to implement or more popular with players.

Below is a summary of all the options / ideas so far:
  • Reveal all votes for all entries
  • randomly reveal votes
  • reveal for votes for the top 5 / top 20
  • reveal the votes for anyone with, eg, more than 35 points
  • winner only
  • When someone places in the top 5 twice in a week / consecutively


How do these sound?

Obviously some suggestions will be easier to implement than others, so perhaps the Artwiculate web coders can offer some preferences or other suggestions.

Thanks!



Photo of Silia J. Hatzi

Silia J. Hatzi

  • 46 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
I forgot to ask you, Michael, out of all your suggestions, which one do you think would work best?
Photo of Michael W

Michael W

  • 48 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
Hmm, that's a good question. I don't really know.

For me, I don't think I "social vote", that is with thought to who might be offended if I didn't vote for them. But that may change over time and other people are obviously worried about it.

So I'd lean towards 2)

And I also think 3) for the top 5 since they are often the positions with the most ... discussion.
Photo of Silia J. Hatzi

Silia J. Hatzi

  • 46 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
Makes sense to me, Michael. Thanks :-)
Photo of Miranda Joubioux

Miranda Joubioux

  • 40 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
I would imagine that 2) randomly revealing votes, would be the easiest for the Artwiculate team to implement, but then I could be wrong.
It is also the one that I prefer because it has that speed camera touch to it, but has little implications on the game overall.
Photo of Silia J. Hatzi

Silia J. Hatzi

  • 46 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
Michael:

Firstly, you're awesome for trying to think & suggest alternatives in an effort to offer this discussion multiple options of how transparency can be effectuated instead of trying to cram your original idea down people's throat despite it being questioned.

Secondly, I agree with Miranda: the random revealing of Top 50 Votes -if such can be configured by Artwiculate without significant investments of time or money- may offer a "Hi, you're on Candid Camera!" solution without other significant effects on voting.
Photo of ultracutebot

ultracutebot

  • 44 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
this idea rocks, Michael. and thanks for reviving my 'old' topic :D
Photo of TiddK

TiddK

  • 216 Posts
  • 23 Reply Likes
Now that this idea is "Under Consideration", I've just had a thought which I feel I must share.

Transparent voting will be for TWEETS not PEOPLE, right?

In other words, random (or Top 5) tweets will show which (anonymous?) people voted for it? Which seems a good idea, especially if the list could show whether those voters follow @artwiculate (or not).

But I hope no-one is suggesting that 'transparent voting' would indicate all the tweets voted for by particular person(s)? That would be an intrusive and invidious scenario which I could never support.

But no-one is actually suggesting this, right? And Artwiculate understand that we are not asking for this, right?
Photo of Michael W

Michael W

  • 48 Posts
  • 21 Reply Likes
Correct, that was always my intention.

The whole point is that the way a tweet got to top 5 / 20 whatever is available for people to see. Both for (a) the tweet police to check for naughtiness and (b) and for the tweeter to not have their crown questioned.

I agree that picking on a person to disclose their votes is not necessary.
Photo of TiddK

TiddK

  • 216 Posts
  • 23 Reply Likes
Great. :-) It was just a thought I had and I wondered if others had also had it. But we seem to be singing from the same hymnsheet :O ♫ ♫