Topic: [Discussion] Bitcointalk Community Awards 🏆 - page 25. (Read 19698 times)

I think the competition would lose its charm if the voting were to become anonymous or overly moderated. The voting process should be open for everyone to see, and there should be no hidden back rooms where decisions are made by a few people. As for merit abuse, it should be publicly discouraged and point out in the OP those who abuse the system. Abuse will always be a problem in some form, but I think that's inevitable. The competition is supposed to be fun, and if people can't see the fun in it, then they shouldn't participate.

As for the voting process, I think a simple upvote system is not enough. It would be better if there were an additional "point" system so that people could give more weight to their votes.

For example, Legendary members can give 5 points in each category, Hero members 4 points, Sr. Members 3 points etc. Members can decide whether they want to give all the points to one candidate or distribute them to several candidates. In my opinion, voting this way would be more fair because it would give priority to senior members who are more active on the forum, and at the same time it would reduce the significance of votes from alt accounts and inactive members. I know this wouldn't be perfect either, but maybe something along those lines.

maybe theymos could turn off the +merit link in a specific thread, thus would exclude the possibility of giving merit for voting posts. but again there is no guarantee that the merit for the vote will not be compensated through another post.
certainly, even if the voting were completely secret, it will not prevent possible abuse and secret deals. it will only be harder to expose them.

We had two seasons if I am not wrong. In both seasons merit was influencing the vote. Members may tried it intentionally or unintentionally which does not matter since it had an influence. Maybe theymos can write a small code (I don't know how small it will be lol) and disable merit from the voting thread. But fast we need to understand how important it is for him as an admin of the community.

There is this user who created the OP patch, may help writing a code. Someone can mention him if they know which is the user I am talking about.

Edit:
It's PowerGlove.

I have no problem trusting you, and neither do 265 users. The problem is that you have to take personal responsibility. And as said, it's not fun that way.

Provably anonymous with theymos intervened isn't going to work. Such voting system would require cryptography to enter the chat.

I don't think that it can be both anonymous and abuse free unless theymos somehow gets involved in it (which I doubt he would want)  and as others said it would be less fun that way.

I personally won't vote for those who merit their voters no matter how deserving of the award they are and if I vote before they start doing it I will simply change my vote.

The drawback will be that people have to trust me on this. My PM publisher is meant to add transparency, not reduce it.

Same loophole. "I'll merit you if you send the vote over LoyceV's bot". We can't avoid bribing, unless we somehow discourage briber. How about this: Your bot counts the votes, but never reveals the voters' username. That way, the briber will be discouraged, because he can't know if the voters lie to him or not. A malicious voter who wants to gain merits would ask from every briber, regardless if he voted for him or not.

On the other hand, it isn't fun to not know who votes what. And this annual event isn't supposed to be election-like. It's for fun. My suggestion is to just request to not use merits in the voting thread.

That's true.

I think the only way to mitigate this a bit is by creating the rule that you cannot give merit to users who voted for us (in the respective post, of course).
Whoever gives merit in the post where it was voted on, that vote does not count.

Even if it's possible, I think it's less fun that way.

Well, there is no way around it. Anyone who wants to be a cheater will be.
I mean, there is a way, which is for the votes to be anonymous. But how would we do that here on the forum?

There's a loophole: "I promise to Merit anyone who voted for me after I win". Or, even if someone doesn't make that promise, some users may expect it anyway and it may still influence their votes.

My PM publisher is available if icopress wants PM-votes.

Padawan! I was just going to PM you about this It seems that great minds think the same and you made this post before having the chance to write you a few ideas (which I will still do, nevertheless).


I did not know this was an issue in the past but, in any case, faster shipping would not disturb anybody


Romanian governess reports for duty! Sir! (Indian accent)


This and some other ideas will appear in a PM which I will send you these days. I just need to put all ideas in order, in my head, thus I'll make some rational proposals. I am confident that this contest will be much better than previous two

Thanks again for offering me the honor of being your right hand

Cool! Looking forward to it.

I'd make it simple and add a very clear rule that meriting in the whole topic is prohibited. Any merit sent from a nominee, cancels one of their votes. Disqualifying would be too harsh, as you could misclick and send a merit once, by accident.

We will look forward to it. 



This point must really be analyzed, and all the rules must be defined before voting begins.
And I have some ideas/suggestions, I'll keep an eye out when the debate starts.

So, in a month this topic will become relevant again.

➥ I'll probably have to spam Cyrus to get him to ship the collectibles faster.
➥ I expect to find sponsors for at least 0.2 Btc, the ideal option is 1 sponsor.
➥ I again count on the help of my Romanian governess.
➥ We need to discuss how sending merit affects voting.

Peace for everyone!

Don't worry; I just put in there whatever I thought people may find interesting / useful! Only recently I removed the link, in favor of a new section on my website where I intend to add it back with similar such topics (that aren't mine, but recommended by me).

Maybe they didn't read your opinion or didn't agree; I think now the topic did get enough attention and it was already concluded something will change for next year. Everyone's on the same page as far as I can tell!

You fully deserved all those nominations, because you are one of the few people in this forum I can talk about different things, even if we don't always agree on everything.
Plus you have been very active and all that without paid signature campaign, that is something not easy to understand by most people.
You even advertised some of my topics for free, so sometimes I feel that I owe you some sats  

I was openly against sending merits to voters after last year when one unnamed bounty manager was doing the same thing.
That is why I don't understand why anyone would repeat the same mistake again, with all due respect :/

In a way you're right: I got tons of nominations and don't think I gave a single merit.
On the other hand, psychologically it makes sense that one might get more votes if he merits posts that vote for him - esp. from voters who seem desperate for merits like bounty grabbers, spammers etc., people who have difficulty getting merits (e.g. some have earned 50 merits in 6 years of being on the forum).

By no means I did not want to discredit the initiative from icopress, why would you suggest I take it from him?

I left my 2 sats because I saw there are many questions regarding the manipulation. And I was surprise to see how we all forget about last year's experience too. Haven't we had very similar discussion last year as well? Someone from African local sent merits to whoever nominated him and eventually after being so much talk we all decided to go with the result. It was fair as that happened for the first time but again in the 2nd season it is annoying me that we continue with the same excuse.

I read everything that GazetaBitcoin said here. And I agree. Disqualifying who sent merit will obviously discredit who just did it just to appreciate their nomination and had nothing else in their mind on the other hand rewarding the award to those who had sole intention to manipulate and to use the power of suggestion means you are discrediting the legitimate contestant who deserved to win an award. You are knowingly going to award the title to someone who misused the loop hole.

Let me finish with an example. Is there anyone who has doubt in mind that achow101 is not a bitcoin geek? Well he is indeed. At least old timers will agree with me. I have no idea who will win from that category but just imagine if achow101 was active in this thread and would giving merits to the users who nominated him. We would see him being nominated x times than he has been nominated now.

Guess this contest is no official contest? Not directly supported by the forum owners, right?
As far as I know, this is a contest created by a forum user, correct?

So, not being an official contest nor with the official sponsorship of the forum administrators, they have no responsibility or involvement in it. Unless the forum rules are violated, which they didn't.

The user, or users, who organized the contest use the rules they think they should use and are presented at the very beginning. It is up to each one to participate or not. As a contest for the community, there is an opportunity for everyone to express their point of view.

Now, it's not worth going around saying that everything was done poorly, that the contest was distorted, that it should be done differently or something like that, to the point of offending others. This is totally inappropriate.

Do you think you could do better? Then promote you a new contest.

I don't think it's worth going around here always saying that everything was bad and that some abused it. Unfortunately, this is already known to happen and it will be a struggle that the entire community must continue to try to counteract.