Topic: [Discussion] Bitcointalk Community Awards 🏆 - page 21. (Read 19700 times)

It might be worth in the future icopress or one of the events team users actually getting into contact with theymos prior to voting next time, and seeing if we can release that kind of information to public in time for the event, so that they can vote more appropriately, i.e most reports in the last year, and potentially most actions by moderators if the moderator vote was reintroduced in the future.

Besides that, I think regularly releasing that information helps users report more. Though, I don't know how much work it's to actually retrieve that data. So, theymos might not go for it. However, it'd be nice if it was a regular thing, and could benefit this event too.

Step ahead of my brain storming. I still have a lot of time to put in though.

Absolute Hero of Good: Team Cryptios and Cyrus. They are doing fantastic job recovering accounts and no one talks about them.
Golden Feather: [working on it]
Bitcointalk Ninja: PowerGlove. He knows coding to improve experience of the forum.
Bitcoin Geek: [working on it]
Event of the Year: ChiBitCTy for Bitcointalk pumpkin craving (I was squeezing my orange 😉)
Fail of the Year: BTC price, TheBitcoinTalkShow, Centralized exchanges (Because of CZ and FTX fall, People are now realizing danger of centralize exchanges.)
Discovery of the Year: n0nce
SpamBuster: [Going to need help from forum moderators for top three reporter of the year]
ScamBuster: No vote. This group of people are tricky. Most of the time they use it to build their reputation and sometimes they scam others when get their chance. I don't trust users fall in the group.  
Craft Master: xhomerx10 and all 65 nominated users from 🎃 Pumpkin Craving Contest.
Antihero: [working on it]
Miss Bitcointalk: lovesmayfamilis this is must be a woman with lots of kids 😉

May be tonight I will give more thoughts and will do my own findings before making my final list.

Good catch and updated.

Thank you... exactly that's what I have been asking since 2021, 2022



I will give it pass.


Why no one is talking about TheBitcoinTalkShow? Am I rushing? Or is it too early call it a fail?


Yes agree, but I guess only regular WO visitors know this.

---

In the end again thank @icopress, these small small events including the Pumpkin Carving contest by @ChiBitCTy are making this boring bitcointalk (excluding WO obliviously) a happening plcae:)

Amen, brother :*

---

High appreciation to both for these efforts!

If anybody else is interested in translating the topic for a local board, feel free to do it. The more, the merrier!

---

Good job, as always, 1miau!

Did we have both event of the year and fail of the year last time? I cannot remember both of those I thought it was just event of the year last time. For the next one can I suggest that they do a 'best Bitcoin start up' to highlight some of the companies that started in the last year that accept btc?

German translation is now ready: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nominierungen-fur-die-grossen-bitcointalk-auszeichnungen-2022-5422351
I've also changed the date of "Event of the year" to 2022.

Line linking other languages is also updated as requested by icopress, please let me know if it's ok. 
Somehow I've removed a bit formatting there as I've unfortunately have messed up the formatting. 
I've also added a link to Meta, where voting takes place.

Thank you! OP updated!

So be it my Lord! 

Yup, it makes sense. icopress already included a link in contest's OP, but it would also help if the rules are updated here as well. Good point, my friend!


Nope, meriting OP is okay.


Merit sources can still do their jobs as usually... The rule addresses mostly this thread. However, if some suspicious activity is detected, it will be investigated. (I am sorry, I can't tell here precisely for what kind of suspicious activity we will look for, as it would give ideas to exploit this too. But it's not regarding Merit Sources activity, anyway... it would be ridiculous. So don't worry )


Grazie tante


Thank you for your feedback.


Especially cycling it =)))

---

I think he meant to have the rules also added to the Discussion topic as well...

---

I'll answer instead of icopress. Yup, that's a typo there. We are voting for 2022.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/voting-2022-bitcointalk-community-awards-topic-discussione-in-italiano-5422327
Please update first topic @icopress with new link for Italian Discussion thread.
Good luck to everyone and thank you for this nice initiative!

Finally it's live means I will need to spend few hours to think of my votes LOL
I will do some draft here 🤣


Absolute Hero of Good: Satoshi, theymos are done. I need someone new.
Golden Feather: JJG is boring LOL
Bitcointalk Ninja: TryNinaja, Mr. Bot and Ddmr are done. I need someone new again
Bitcoin Geek: No achow101, I need to think of a fresh blood.
Event of the Year: Bitcointalk pumpkin craving (I was squeezing my orange 😉)
Fail of the Year: FTX, BTC price drop from $69 to under $16k
Discovery of the Year: There is a user who have good bitcoin technical knowledge and in chipmixer campaign. He is relatively new forum member.
SpamBuster: No fucking idea. I would like to fine who have sent most report for this year
ScamBuster: This group of people are tricky. Most of the time they use it to build their reputation and sometimes they scam others when get their chance. I don't trust users falls in the group. No vote
Craft Master: Homer from WO
Antihero: Thinking
Miss Bitcointalk: I highly doubt Foxpup is she.

@icopress - thanks for the awards again this year  Will be voting today

Not sure if there’s an error or not - could be a copy and paste error ……

Quote “Event of the Year
What event had the biggest impact on you?

This nomination is a tribute to the most notable events in the crypto community or the most significant for you personally. This is the second annual award, you can only nominate and vote for all significant events of 2021”
 
Are we we voting on 2021 or 2022 ? Sorry to be pedantic 

Well, yes. That's what makes it a superior system - it takes in to account second and third choices rather than just a single choice.

Well that wouldn't work, since the individual voters last year were not told to rank their three picks by order of preference.

Regardless, the competition is now launched, so this discussion is kind of moot.

You can't send merit to the second post and only, so this doesn't apply to the OP.


Also, in the OP, I already provided a link to GB's post.  

Thanks Gazeta.
As a suggestion, I would put those rules in the OP of this thread, updating past rules, or I would provide a direct link to this post, as it would be difficult for a random user, like me, to land on the correct post.


I would like to merit the OP of the Contest Thread by Icopress, I see he voted for me, would that infringe the rules?
As a merit source, dropping merits everywhere on the forum, if this rule would extend beyond the tread it would be very difficult for me to make sure there are no incident.
As a declaration I am also going to merit this post by Gazeta.


I am strongly against this measure.
If an user is too good, then it’s our task doing better, not tweaking the rules to demote him.
Merit is important in this forum! (Pun intended).

No, the order still matters for the elimination rounds.

The idea is good, but that means that the three choices that a user makes, have no order of preference and are all worth the same, is that it? In other words, everyone gets one vote.

But now I ask, isn't that what is already done?
What is the advantage of the OP asking for 3 choices for each category, if later it would only count with the first name?

Now you're assuming not many people had theymos as their second choice, while the other candidates had many "second place votes". It would be nice if someone does the math on last year's results, it would be interesting to see if anything changes.

Makes sense, maybe it's an option for our next round one year later because I can't judge how much more work it would be to do it like that in the end and after all, the benefit should outweigh the additional work because I believe managing and counting all votes from all participants for each category will be quite time consuming for icopress and GazetaBitcoin.
But still, log earned Merit votes are an interesting idea of course. 

Actually, I misspoke. Since there is only going to be a single winner in each category, you don't need to use single transferable vote. Instant runoff voting is easier. The process from the voters' point of view is actually the same in each system.

Everyone could still be allowed three votes in each category, or could be allowed as many votes are they like, but instead of just picking x number of users you would rank them first choice, second choice, third choice, and so on. This is the limit of what individual users need to do.

To calculate the winner, you simply tally all the votes by their first choice. Then, look for the user or users with the fewest number of first choice votes, and they are eliminated. All their ballots are then redistributed to the next highest choice candidate. Repeat this process over and over until only one candidate remains, and they are the winner.

It is a much more fair system than simply using first past the post. Let's say, for example, theymos got 20 votes, you got 18, and I got 16. With first past the post, theymos wins. With first past the past, theymos wins with 20 votes, but 34 votes end up getting a choice they didn't want at all. But what if of the 16 people who voted for me, 14 wouldn't want theymos to win at all and would prefer you to win? With instant run off voting, you would win with 32 people getting either their first or second choice, and only 22 people getting a choice they didn't want at all.

But as I said, I can guarantee the majority of users would not read the instructions or would misunderstand them, so although it is an all round better system, probably best not to use it.

I tried to quickly find out what a single transferable vote is, but couldn't figure it out without spending more than a few minutes. I think that puts me with the ~90%, which makes me think it's not a good idea. Voting should be easy, so dumb people can vote too (after all, dumb people can also get elected).