Survey posted 1999-09-07 01:58 by Andy.

Contribute ideas to surveys by sending a mail to survey@ticalc.org.

I think we're kidding ourselves if we think the ticalc.org staff is going to make totally different selections for nominations than the rest of the world. Anyone who tries a game like SMQ is going to know that it is obviously a good choice, and that "John Doe's TI-81 Guessing Game" is not. Sure, there will be exceptions sometimes, when ticalc.org neglects to see the power in a specific program, but for the most part this would work. Do you think we'll really have an instance, using the current system (where users volunteer nominations) that a program would win the POTM, yet the ticalc.org staff would not have nominated it if they chose the programs themselves? ticalc.org probably implimented the new system so that people wouldn't complain about their program being on the ballad, but that's just their own problem; if the ticalc.org staff doesn't recognize a good program then the rest of the users probably won't either.

Well. There are a few things about us choosing. For example, in the current system, there was only one 92 asm program this month - it *will* win. That might not happen if we selected manually. Also, we might tend to choose programs that have more merit or are new and worthy of attention as opposed to popular updates. Also it would mean that there wouldn't be the problem of programs winning without some people having tried them before voting on them.

Going with what Kirk said, having only one option in a particular category, while having over a dozen (!) in another is rediculous. Hopefully by letting ticalc.org select nominees, this won't happen. Much.

When did I argue against that? I agree completely - that's one of the many reasons ticalc.org members should select nominees.

Please excuse my ignorance. I read one thing and thought it was something else.

Humbly yours

Unfortunately, the will of the masses seems to be to keep it the way it is. And that's kind of stupid, because we're going to intervene in some manner or form by keeping previous winners off of the nomination list in the future.

Although I can see the reasons behind keeping past winners off the nomination list, I will have to disagree. Say John Q. Programmer makes the absolute Game-To-End-All-Games, or something like ALG48 for the HP48... I hardly consider it fair to vote that as PoTM for April, then due to insufficent submissions in May, have the new PoTM be Billy Bob Dumas' Guess the Number Game.

The ticalc.org staff will consider my opinions, mayhap?

Well see I have long said that we shouldn't have POTM. Instead we should have something else that our file archivers award to programs of merit. Thus there might be two 86 programs that are good one month and none the next month, but both still win. But nobody listens.

What you need to do is come up with a clever acronym for your idea, then people will listen :) I think the best way to do it though, is have this type of system in addition to POTM, sort of like an honorable mention.

How about basing it the number of downloads a file has?

This too means that the popular games are favored over the ones that aren't so popular but might be deserving of recognition.

That would be a good idea, because the programs people use more often would be favored. However, some people (like me) will download programs just to see what they are. So, even though not many people might do that, it could skew the results if everyone wants to see what a game is, but don't like it at all.

The current system seems to work fairly well, so I think that's how it should be.

Too easy to cheat. Believe it or not, there ARE people lame enough to download their TI-80 BASIC Guessing Game 200 times just so that it would win the POTM. Even if they had to log off and on again to change their IP (assuming it's dynamic).

Do you really think that John Doe would have a static IP, Adam? That would be leet of him/her :)

--BlueCalx

My dad has cable and he's.. uh, not what you would call leet :)

Does your dad author TI programs? I wish my dad could do that :)

--BlueCalx

I've seen everybody's point, but how abut this:

1. You must be a user to nominate.
2. You may only nominate 10 times.
3. You may not nominate a program until you download it.
4. Then, as long as you meet reqirements 1,2,3, you may click a chekmark next to the download to nominate it. At the bottom of the D/L page, you must hit SUBMIT NOMINATIONs to submit them.

This seems to be a fair way.

Also, TICALC.ORG staff shold be able to add extra nominations. This is to keep the "You Win- You're The Only One Nominated!" problem to a minimum.

I don't know about basing POTM on file downloads, but I definitly think the # of downloads should be included in the file info page.

-Dan

I think it would work well if a panel of judges were designated to test the programs and either select the nominations or just select the winners. If they just select the winners, you should have #1,#2,#3, and maybe even a runner up. And the judges should be avid calculator users, but also be able to appreciate a programming accomplishment. Just mho.

Obviously, not EVERYONE is going to be satisfied with any system because they are all pulling for the program they like the best. Remember when Prosit lost one month (under the current system), there were plenty of angry people. Even if the voters control the award entirely, some people will probably be upset.

We were not angry, we were just pointing out that people where not aware of the greatness of Prosit. Would you call the Linux users upset? Even though Microsoft Windows has more security holes than the targets at the shooting range? Would you call the people that dumped tea into Boston Harbour mad? They were just trying to make people aware of the unfair taxation of goods..........


PROSIT RULES!!!!!!!
LINUX RULES!!!!!!!!!

Something better than user nominations is needed. I didn't vote for a POTM this month b/c I didn't think any of them were worthy (for the 89). I mean, Nibbles??? Who cares if SMQ or whatever wins every month, it's cause they're the best! If you want to see other programs win, then create one that's better. Basing it on downloads wouldn't work because since Ticalc doesn't include a description, you have to download it to see what it is. (Hint, hint)

--mwdelta

Huh? Most of our files have descriptions under them on the info pages...