The January 2010 Round 1 Riff-Off Is Live!

[GoDrex]

he said you could vote zero...

[tone4days]

I apologize if it was taken as an insult... was not meant to be.

It just seems like we're trying to fix a problem that isn't there

no worries

the problem is there - the problem as many folks rightly point out is that the random pairing and bracketing leaves worse riffers to advance while better riffers go home ... a point system has the potential to let the cream rise to the top through consistent good riffing from round to round ... of course, averaging has the likelihood of letting the worse riffers advance too, so we'll have to see if someone with (potentially far) fewer points advances over someone who got much more support

[tone4days]

he said you could vote zero...

necessary but not sufficient

did you read the scenario i presented? .. remember the round that was something like 44-2? ...

folks do realize the likelihood that the "2" guy would most probably have advanced, right?

[LesStrat]

No veiled insults, just a friendly jab.

Keef's proposed solution is very close your your FIRST proposal, IIRC...without the additional pages of elaboration.

[ratherdashing]

it surprises me that on a free and open discussion site (as opposed to, say, a workplace where someone is in charge and has the power to make a unilateral decision), someone could be confused by the fact that people are discussing freely trying to synthesize a solution that incorporates as many good ideas from as many points of view as are available ... strikes me as the height of hubris to believe that one person would just try to unilaterally declare something like that - in fact, i think anyone who tried that could rightly be called an *******

for myself, i welcome all ideas especially given that those who dont want to share any or read any are free to ignore the conversation .... as i understand it, there will be a vote after the experiment in february ... those who like the way the first two have been run can express that sentiment with a vote at that time ... those of us who feel like lesser riffers went forward at the expense of better riffers want to try something to remedy that and make the whole thing better for it ... i cant see the grounds to defend that when the idea of having the better guys around longer kinda is the point ...

edit cause i was typing while keith was answering - i dont think keith is an ******* - in this case, he is the battlemaster and we have to live by what he decides

When I said "somebody" I was specifically thinking Keith, Adam, or Stevie Bees. I figured that was implied, but I guess I should have been clear on that point.

Coming to a peer consensus would be fantastic, but if it's not clear by now that this will never happen, I don't know what else to tell you. Look at how long this has been going on already. We have pages and pages of discussion, and no sign of it stopping anytime soon.

It's not like we're trying to cure cancer here ... this is a guitar riff contest.

wow

intentionally building in a flaw like that could make for a mismatch come time to vote between the bracket vs. points method

please remind me again - what problem does averaging solve?

Averaging is meant to solve the problem of some rounds getting fewer votes than others, is it not? Didn't this get brought up a few pages ago?

Can we just agree to give it a try in February and see what happens?

[tone4days]

No veiled insults, just a friendly jab.

Keef's proposed solution is very close your your FIRST proposal, IIRC...without the additional pages of elaboration.

you recall incorrectly - you'll have to provide a post number of mine that gave you that impression

i have never been for averaging and demonstrated why not at least two different ways

if you go back, you see that keith stated that he made an assumption and based his approach on what he thought would be simpler under that assumption - he never explicitly addressed how his dictum would or would not address the problem trying to be solved

[Pink Unicorn Horsey]

if you go back, you see that keith stated that he made an assumption and based his approach on what he thought would be simpler under that assumption - he never explicitly addressed how his dictum would or would not address the problem trying to be solved

It solves the problem because I'm infallible.

[tone4days]

Averaging is meant to solve the problem of some rounds getting fewer votes than others, is it not?

ok, i understand the intent - thanks for reminding me... but i have demonstrated how the law of small numbers turns the selected approach (averaging) into an aggravating change, not a mitigating one ... the differences in number of votes per round is statistically small AND is a function of a riff attracting votes by its quality (the whole point of a contest to find a favorite)

Can we just agree to give it a try in February and see what happens?

well, no agreement is necessary - it has been decided ... i had held out hope that in a discussion forum, my points would be responded to on their merits or lack thereof ... as it is, my examples go by essentially unrefuted (infallibility aside)