Is it possible to issue an voting ebot ( like a ballot paper ) to members with a minimum record of log-on time? This would have a link to the poll and only be useable once, thereafter becoming inactive. It would also overcome the problem of how to let everyone in all the forums and galleries know there is a poll going on for AOM & AOY. I realise that is a lot of ebots to be sending out, though there might be a way to affix this to the top of to the newsletter once a month?

No idea ;) It's certainly worth adding to the pot though.

"Voting in a thread. This could well discourage people from voting at all, or fell compelled to vote for their friend who is in the running even if they prefer someone elses work." I agree with you Kevin, this is possible. I quote myself from another thread on this point as I feel that the heart of the matter is the ability of voters to give an honest vote, as they feel it at the time, above every other consideration. There is a chance that the folks one did not vote for might respect one the more for it. " If people are confident that they have cast a just vote there should be no shame in their choice. There is room in this method to give other artists special mention as well so that no one should feel left out, it just calls for a little self-confidence in ones choice and confidence that others will respect it. A small price to pay for the sake of an open and transparent result."

Yep, I agree with that in principle Brendan, but sadly there are some people who wouldn't be able to cope with their friends voting for someone else. That's not intended to be a poke at anyone either, just a statement of fact ;) Anonymous voting is going to be more difficult to manage and police, but IMO it's a fairer and less 'pressurised' way.

Brendan, I agree with Kevin, there are a bit of people that would feel pressured to vote the same as their friends in order to remain in their circle. Anonymous is the only fair way in which to do this and I certainly think that voting confined to active memberships is the best way to go and the easiest in which to program. Jack

Set up a "Renderosity Artist of the Month" and "Renderosity Artist of the Year" contest at a completely different site - like say, 3-D Arena or Poser Pros - that's not run by Renderosity, get prize donations etc, and have it open to all of the members of the community for voting. And then just email Tammy and Tim afterwards and let them know who won so they can put it on the front page. Kind of like the current setup seems to be proposing: cut the members out of the loop and just let us know who won after it's over. That way, since the major bone of contention seems to be how the Rosity Admins handle the community interaction, and the contest administration, just elminate the problem by cutting the Rosity admins out of the loop. Hey - it could work! Just a suggestion. ;]

Sigh!..... I agree with both of you and will put that little ideal back in it's box even though it is not the fault of any polling system that folks would feel that way. I can understand a scruple about telling a lie, the elusive idea is the scruple about being honest. Anyways, there is much else in this thread that recommends itself for consideration. Cheers Gents!

Bit of a cross post Kevin and Jack. That made me laugh Mr Ironbear.

grin That was actually a serious suggestion, even though I'm sure it'll fly like a lead zeppelin. ;]

It's the heightened ironicness of your irony that cheers me Mr! although it be serious. Much like Ockhams Razor calls for a leap of imagination that is possibly beyond the present thinking here? I defer in every respect.

That might be Occham for some readers?

Possibly that lesser known corollary "Occam's Switchblade"? ;]

Much more fun to use but easier to cut yourself with ;)

True, but sometimes I just prefer to whip out "Ockham's Machete'" - shuts 'em all up in no time flat. 'course, I do tend to get accused of having no tact when I do that, but... shrug. /P

Tact is a highly over rated social grace, Pengy. ;]

kbennett: Glad to have you aboard. ;0)

"AOY be decided by a cumulative annual total of the AOM votes. Probably (but not definitely) this would result in a Poser artist being the AOY every time since the Poser AOM contest is likely to get the most voting."

Is the AOM always a Poser artist? If not, then this proves that the biases over one program do not seriously affect the outcome of the voting.

"A minimum time of membership before being allowed to vote. As stated before, this would eliminate instant clones. One problem I can forsee is that this would disbar new but valid members from voting, which might not be acceptable."

Many sites that I have seen use this technique for trying to deal with clones. If it is stated right off the bat that "upon registering, you will have access to all public site features with the exception of voting in contests/polls until you reach [insert target metric]", then no one could have a problem with it. I think it is an acceptable risk to take to resolve some of the clone activity.

However, length of membership should not be the only criteria. I could set up a clone, wait [time interval] and begin to wreak havok. I would suggest a more thorough set of criteria based upon what information is stored.

From the top of my noggin, what metrics do we have to work with:

• Registration Information: Most of this could be fudged, with the exception of the E-mail address; which is confirmed before continuing with Registration
• .
• E-mail Address: Although e-mail accounts are less than a dime a dozen nowadays, it could be used to "weed out" accounts that have the same e-mail address for those who do not willfully want to deceive.
• Gallaries: As we have seen, many people choose not to post to the Galleries, so this probably would not work unless you "forced" someone to post "something" in their gallery.
• Freebies: Suffers the same as the Galleries.
• MarketPlace Purchases: IMHO, it would be unethical to use any commercial transaction information on the site for anything other than the transaction.
• Forum Posts: I am not sure whether R'osity tracks the number of posts a member has made, but this could be used (ie, minimum of X posts) to deter clones and "inactive" members.
• Length of Membership: This could be easily determined (Now-RegisterDate) and used to weed out "instant clones", but not inactive clones that wait for the time interval. Still useful to consider, IMHO.
• Online Time: Although this could show how "active" a member is, some members may have little time to spend in any given session to make this worthwhile. Also, it can be "fooled" by leaving the session up and refreshing; unless a session timeout was implemented forcing more frequent refreshes.
• IP Address: This has too many complications to be worthwhile, with dynamic IPs, proxies, access to multiple systems, etc.

Suggested Voting Methods: - Cumulative Voting: It would appear that this may/may not be possible but introduce some voting biases based off the percentage of the membership that vote per given forum.

• E-bot Voting: The e-bot could send out links to the poll to only active members. However, someone could use the link or post it and allow the public in; unless the e-mail address is used for verification.
• Mods/Admins Only Voting: This would solve the clone problem, but alienate the members.
• No Contests/Voting: This would alleviate the whole mess, but also cause some backlash. I would consider this a "last effort" tactic.
• Off-Site Voting: Set up a disinterested third-party vote somewhere else. This would require anyone who wanted to vote to probably have to register somewhere else (unless the member database is shared or somehow coded to allow outside queries).
• Public Voting: Another potential possibility, but it could affect the outcome and/or voter response.

Have I missed anything?

Going off what I have, we have the following potentially viable metrics to consider:

• E-mail Address: One vote per e-mail address. (Of limited use.)
• Forum Posts: Minimum number of posts (ie, 50, 100, etc).
• Length Of Membership: Must be a member for a minimum amount of time.

Combining the three in a database query would be relatively easy. However, does this resolve enough of the potential problems to make it worthwhile?

When you get down to the "brass tacks", you can see the potential problems and that an "easy solution" may not be that easy. ;0)

G'day 'Stretch ;)

"Is the AOM always a Poser artist?"

Nope, each month's AOM comes from a different area. There is some overlap of course. The problem I see is that the AOM contest for the Poser month gets (I think) a lot more voting than, say, the Rhino month. So the winner of the Poser AOM contest is more likely to win AOY by default.

"Many sites that I have seen ... "

Agree with you on that. It would have to be combined with some sort of activity counter like visits per month, time online etc.

I'm not sure I agree with the selection of metrics though.

• Email addresses are as you say, less than a dime a dozen. Just to give an example, anyone who subscribes to the UK ISP Demon Internet as I do gets a domain name and unlimited email addresses. Basically anything ending in @{hostname}.demon.co.uk gets to the owner of {hostname}.
• Forum posts Like the galleries, some folks don't frequent the forums and only come here for the artwork or to buy stuff.
• Online time/number of visits I still think this is a go-er and if done carefully could be very useful. There's already script-blocking to stop harvesting, and though I don't know the ins and outs of it I would think it possible to catch multiple refreshes of the same page.

Methods

• Cumulative Voting: Still think this would favour any Poser artists too much.
• E-bot Voting: Could be very useful. Maybe adding one more step; verification. The ebot sends out notification to active members, who click the link to vote. The ebot contains a link with a unique embedded code (like Form.SessKey or whatever.) The server code detect the embedded ID then marks that vote as cast and refuses further GETs that contain that ID.
• Mods/Admins Only Voting: like you say, this alienates the members.
• No Contests/Voting: definitely a last resort.
• Off-Site Voting: All that does is put the burden of verification on to a third party who then has to go through some kind of vetting process themselves.
• Public Voting: Like we both say, probably influences voting.

I don't think you missed anything ;)

So taking your list and changing it, my preference for metrics and method would be:

• Length of membership
• Online time in the previous 30 days
• Number of visits in the previous 30 days
• Some sort of e-bot voting

This is a code-only solution and would therefore be impartial and pretty much transparent so long as the method was published.

hawkfyr sez in #28:

Plus it helps prevent folks from harvesting votes from newsgroups or other communities they frequent.

Folks would come her,create an account just to vote,never to return.

Would they never return? Renderosity's frequent use of
"mail this to a friend" links seem to indicate that they
promote the idea of current users drawing new users in from
other venues. From what other pool would they get new users
if they didn't?

I myself was initially introduced to Renderosity via a
usenet posting soliciting votes (and yes, I did vote right
after joining). Since then I have established a gallery,
participated in and learned from discussions, helped others
when able, and even became a runner-up in the Renderosity
Photography Forum Calendar contest. My interest in
photography has since wained for other interests, but for
that time, I was an active member who tried to add value
to the place. My gallery is still in place because I know
that my interests run in cycles and eventually I'll regain
interest in photography.

So I don't agree that new users from other venues will
necessarily never return if they join in order to vote
for one whose work they are already familiar. I think
it's more realistic that the ratio of those who stay
after voting is the same as that of those who come here
for any other reason.

And I'm not sure what you mean by "harvesting votes".
"Harvesting" as applied to the net implies something
non-conscentual, as in "The spammer harvested my email
address from the mailing-list I was on." There is
nothing non-conscentual about soliciting votes, no
matter where the solicitation takes place. People from
other venues are just being made aware of the contest
and their ability to vote in it.

How is that any different (aside from the venue) from
being made aware of the contest here within Renderosity?
Is it somehow not possible for one to solicit votes in
the forums?

I can understand and agree with the need to prevent people
from creating clone accounts in order to eliminate ballot
stuffing (the true definition of the term), which is
obviously unfair, but I can't see a reason to prevent
people from other venues from coming here to vote in a
contest.

It would seem that what's needed is a more sure-fire
way of validating the identity of a given person, rather
than restricting the votes to old-timers.

The reason I included E-mail Addresses (Of limited use.) is:

• Joe signs up using JoeUser as a username and joeuser@isp.com for an e-mail address.
• Joe decides he wants another "persona" and a new User Name.
• Joe decides to use JoeBlow as a username and joeuser@isp.com as the e-mail address.
• Joe now has two accounts; which could potentially be used to vote twice. If a query is run across the database finding user names associated with the e-mail address joeuser@isp.com (in this case: JoeUser and JoeBlow), it could be coded to only accept one vote per e-mail address required during registration.

Hope that makes it clearer. ;0)

Sure does ;)

I've been told that there is an admin team meeting in the next week or so, and the whole AOY thing is going to be discussed there. So if we want to polish up a proposal for consideration, it needs to be ready by Friday.

I wonder if any the team has been following this thread? I have absolutely no knowledge of what is possible on the technical side of the problem, so any remarks from the team on ideas posted so far, would help me help everyone else to come to some proposal. It would be helpful to know if any of the ideas proposed so far interest the PTB? and if any are a non starter in their view? Even with the efforts you guys have been putting into this thread, I feel we are having a one way conversation. Sincerely. Brendan.

I agree with Brendan. As a precursor to the Meeting, have the PTB review and participate in the thread; or even just one person who is authorized to work with us to help us formulate a plan who may have indepth knowledge of the system and what is/is not feasible. By the PTB (or a representative) becoming involved, a formalized "plan" would be unnecessary; as they would know what needs to be done vs rewriting it. It would also help to know what other criteria may need to be considered since this, presumably, deals not only with the voting process but also the award process.

I've asked one of the programmers, who is also a site admin, to take a look from a technical viewpoint. I expect most of the admin team will be going through these threads before their meeting, but obviously can't guarantee that or speak for them.

TY, kbennett. You have been most helpful. ;0)

Dear Kevin, I am pasting below a message I posted to JeffH in the unofficial vote thread. His reference to an Official vote leads me to think that I was misleading myself as to the purpose of this thread, that anything discussed here is actually pertains to next years voting and not, as I thought, finding a resolution and consensus on the process for voting for AOY 2002. Do you have any insight as to what is actually happening at this very moment? I am totally at a loss as to what to think. Cheers Mister! ___________________________________________ Forgive me Jeff, I seem to have missed something along the way? Could you point me in the direction of any notices posted about the Official voting and it's finishing date?, I am curious to see the information for myself. I most probably misunderstand the situation by thinking that the admins are going ahead with their plan to choose AOY in closed session, I thought the matter was pending whilst under discussion? The only reference to efforts of some of the members here to suggest ideas for solutions is pasted below. --------- 8. Re: 2003 AOY by tammymc on 12/29/02 17:12 Thanks for all the feedback. I am taking these to the admins for discussion... it will probably take a few weeks before you hear from us. thanks tammy --------- I find it perplexing that tammy has not seen fit to respond to the much longer thread of suggestions that preceded the one cited above, even though the thread was instigated by her invitation to the membership to proffer ideas. Link provided for anyone who wishes to contribute. I would be grateful for any clarification you can provide. Sincerely. Brendan.

Hey Brendan ;) As far as I understand the current situation it is that the 2002 AOY will be decided by the mod/admin vote. Any discussion in this thread is aimed at ensuring a mutually acceptable method for voting next year. Until the admin team hold their next meeting though, I wouldn't take anything as being concrete. Kevin.

Thanks Kevin!

Well, kbennett, it was a good try, but I feel this thread has been ignored although others have had intervention from "higher up". AFAIC, this will be the last time I take any serious time to try to provide solutions for a site that apparently already had its mind made up before I started. Not discounting your involvement at all. Thanks for at least paying attention while others looked the other way.

It is singularly conspicuous that tammymc has ignored this thread. From a personal point of view I think the absence of a response contemptuous.

I have been posting in other threads ongoing about the AOM/AOY and have communicated that we would continue with our current system until we have a better one. One of our programmers has posted in the TammyMc thread as well. I have been monitoring this forum and ws planning on taking some feedback to the admin next week. I appreciate all the posts that people have been giving especially trying to come up with good solutions. I will try and address some of the potentials that you have listed and communicate our side. Cyberstretch - we already limit emails. Only one email can be created within this community. If you try to sign up with an email already taken, it will not let you. The problem we are having is that people go and sign up with freebie emails....and join as another member. If we consider IP addresses, then we have the issue of dynamic IPs, static IPs that are used by several people, and anonymous IPs. We have considered limiting votes to members that have been here for a period of time, but means that they would be able to use their clone votes and we would basically be restricting new members which would be approximately 8000 if we look at a 30 day period. We have not thought about forum posts and voting. Have to think on this one. E-bot voting - we have not thought about this as well. We do list the AOM voting in our weekly newsletter which reaches 70% of the members. We know that the percentage for participation in the AOM is very small. If more members would vote, that would make a difference. We put information about the AOM in the welcoming email to new members. We include this in our newsletter, and place on the front page. I don't want to come across as downing the suggestions. It is that we have some time discussing the issues of the AOM for about 2 years now, so we have a head start on you. : ) In my opinion, this is not an easy solution and that is why we have went through 4 different ways of trying this. 1. First, admins selected the AOM. This did not include participation of the community so wanted to improve. 2. Second, Members nominated and voted. Too much cheating. 3. Third, private nomination committee with members voting. Cheating decreased tremendously but the committee did not quite work well. 4. Fourth, mods/admin nominate, members vote. Has been the best system we have found. The AOY will always be mods/admin voting at this time. I hope this helps with the discussion. thanks tammy

Thanks for the response, Tammy. Perhaps if we knew more about the issues you are facing regarding a new and more equitable system, we would be more capable of coming up with better solutions/suggestions? I do not mind sharing ideas, etc, but there has to be a two-way communication for anything to work out. The biggest issue seems to be clone accounts. Since R'osity has publicly stated that they have methods of finding some cloned accounts, perhaps that could be useful in assisting with the voting? I do not expect a full disclosure of internal operating procedures (since that would also assist the clones), but some level of resources or what we have to work with would be beneficial. There is never going to be a 100% foolproof system, but there should be a happy medium somewhere.

Seems obvious that if people are willing to go to great lengths to cheat, they'll probably figure out a way to circumvent whatever voting system's in place. Instead of insisting that the voting process has to be 100% bulletproof, it might be more practical to do what you can to limit clone accounts and limit voting to members of at least a week's standing--most likely these two steps alone would eliminate a high percentage of potential clone votes (also, you might consider making clone voting a specific, no-tolerance TOS violation; might slow people down a little). Or, forget the notion of community-selection altogether and just hand the damn thing out to whoever paints the best hair. The way it is now doesn't make any sense at all--it's just a wave in the direction of member participation.

This was the first and most seriously focused thread exploring ideas after Tammys oversight whereby the AOY poll was posted for three days and then suddenly pulled. Why this thread was the last to get any response from on high? I will never understand, all I know is it is too late for me. Have a nice life.

I was looking at the link title in Cyber's first post when I came in on the ebot. Heh heh.... "Dear Tim:" sounds like a good title for an "Advice to the Artlorn" column. ;]

Yes, previously this has been the biggest area of concern -- the multiple accounts. We do have a process for tracking these. tammy

No offense, Tammy, but we could use a little help if you want a possible solution. We know that clone accounts are (probably) the biggest part of the problem. But, we can only speculate on what can be done without some internal help.

There is not much more that I can communicate. If there is something specific, please let me know. I have communicated what we have done in the past and are doing now. That I think the current system is the best that we have found. We just need to do a better job of implementing. Sorry CyberStretch, I just do not have anything further to present. You know what I know for the most part. The admins will be discussing what has been listed here this week. thanks tammy