Working out some Showcase Kinks

[Ishmayl-Retired]

Hiya folks,
Friendly Neighborhood Overlord here.

I've been doing some thinking, mostly admittedly due in part to a very frank PM I received on the nature of those involved with Setting Showcase.

When I first started Showcase back up, my intention was to make the selection process 100% random.  The reason for this is very simple - I have several favorite campaign settings on this forum, and I didn't want my likes to subconsciously influence which campaign settings received Showcase status.  However, because of that, I seem to have (understandably, after thinking about it) miffed a few people off.

There are so many of you guys who are so dedicated to this site - you're here for hours a day, you love the conversations, you enjoy the debates, you relish in the foolhardiness of the Tavern, and you actually contribute to the site.  You people 100% deserve to have your settings Showcased.

However, there's a problem.  Those of you who are here all the time, and deserve it the most, have not submitted your settings (save for 2, whom I won't name).  I'm not entirely sure if everyone thinks their setting isn't ready, or if they think it doesn't deserve Showcasedness (100 points for fictional words!), but for whatever reason, I have very few submission, and I find that disappointing.  There are so many lovely, wonderful settings on this site that aren't getting the attention they deserve, and now we have an excellent way of making that attention happen, and less than 10 people have taken advantage of it.

On the other end of the spectrum, there are three Showcases that have been submitted that strike me in an uncomfortable way.  One is from an author who has constantly updated his/her own site since day one, but has never offered any advice to any other authors, one is from an author who only showed up on the site for a total of a month and then disappeared, and one is from an author who actually did participate and contribute to the site for awhile, but has been absent for over a month now.  Yet, in all the fairness I try to uphold, I have to put these three campaigns up for Showcase just like everyone else's.

Maybe it's not fair.  Maybe there should be some stipulations for settings to be Showcased, such as "One must be an active member of the community."  But the more rules and stipulations that get applied, the fewer people will submit (or so I estimate).

So, here are my 2 questions - answer them as frank and candid as you like, there will be no hard feelings (at least, none from my end).

Question, the First:
What in all of Elysium's name can I do to get you people to submit your settings?  Do you need bribes?  I suppose I can pocket some prizes or bribes or something, but that seems somewhat silly to me.  What if I bribed you with little "award icons" you could post in your signature?  Honestly, I'm kinda joking about the bribes, but maybe you guys can let me know what would help you submit.

Question, the Next:
What would be a better way, in your esteemed collective opinions, to choose how we rotate Showcase?  Believe me, I want the real site contributors to get first chance, but I also want to be fair.

Let me know - I'll be waiting.

-Ish

[Kindling]

I respond with a question of my own, born of deep and unforgiveable ignorance... how does one submit a setting for showcase? As soon as I know, I shall do so.

[Ishmayl-Retired]

Man, if that's all I need to do, maybe we can do some revamping of the links and such around here:

http://thecbg.org/page.php?46

[Kindling]

My application has been sent.

[Poseptune]

I'm going to answer here, and when I get home I will give another answer elsewhere (Since the Opal Council is watching it shouldn't be too hard to find.)

So, here are my 2 questions - answer them as frank and candid as you like, there will be no hard feelings (at least, none from my end).

Question, the First:
What in all of Elysium's name can I do to get you people to submit your settings?  Do you need bribes?  I suppose I can pocket some prizes or bribes or something, but that seems somewhat silly to me.  What if I bribed you with little "award icons" you could post in your signature?  Honestly, I'm kinda joking about the bribes, but maybe you guys can let me know what would help you submit.

I'll answer by answering "Why don't you submit?". I don't feel that my setting should knock any other setting out of the spotlight. Way back when it just wasn't done enough, now I have stuff, but I haven't been working on it. I am going to shelve my current project and start working on my setting once again, but even now I just don't feel it is showcase material.

Question, the Next:
What would be a better way, in your esteemed collective opinions, to choose how we rotate Showcase?  Believe me, I want the real site contributors to get first chance, but I also want to be fair.

Let me know - I'll be waiting.

-Ish

Weighted randomness. The more active in reviewing a poster is the more numbers he gets in the lottery. For example: Let's take Poster 1 thru 10 (P1 to P10). P1 thru P4 are average posters so they start off with the base number of 5 numbers. P5 is very active and is always reviewing other people's work, he gets 15 numbers. P6 hasn't been here in a month and either gets 1 number or 0 numbers. P7 is always here working on their setting but never review, he gets 2 or 3 numbers. P8 thru P10 are above average posters but no where near the level of P5, so they get ten numbers.


So you're chart will look like this:
[th]Poster[/th][th]Roll #s[/th]

P1	1 thru 5
P2	6 thru 10
P3	11 thru 15
P4	16 thru 20
P5	21 thru 35
P6	----
P7	36 and 37
P8	38 thru 47
P9	48 thru 57
P10	58 thru 67

Roll 1d67 and see who comes up. Everyone still has a chance only those that contribute more, get more of a chance.

 [dice]1d67[/dice]

P9's setting is chosen.

[Seraph]

I'm going to answer here, and when I get home I will give another answer elsewhere (Since the Opal Council is watching it shouldn't be too hard to find.)

So, here are my 2 questions - answer them as frank and candid as you like, there will be no hard feelings (at least, none from my end).

Question, the First:
What in all of Elysium's name can I do to get you people to submit your settings?  Do you need bribes?  I suppose I can pocket some prizes or bribes or something, but that seems somewhat silly to me.  What if I bribed you with little "award icons" you could post in your signature?  Honestly, I'm kinda joking about the bribes, but maybe you guys can let me know what would help you submit.

I'll answer by answering "Why don't you submit?". I don't feel that my setting should knock any other setting out of the spotlight. Way back when it just wasn't done enough, now I have stuff, but I haven't been working on it. I am going to shelve my current project and start working on my setting once again, but even now I just don't feel it is showcase material.

Question, the Next:
What would be a better way, in your esteemed collective opinions, to choose how we rotate Showcase?  Believe me, I want the real site contributors to get first chance, but I also want to be fair.

Let me know - I'll be waiting.

-Ish

Weighted randomness. The more active in reviewing a poster is the more numbers he gets in the lottery. For example: Let's take Poster 1 thru 10 (P1 to P10). P1 thru P4 are average posters so they start off with the base number of 5 numbers. P5 is very active and is always reviewing other people's work, he gets 15 numbers. P6 hasn't been here in a month and either gets 1 number or 0 numbers. P7 is always here working on their setting but never review, he gets 2 or 3 numbers. P8 thru P10 are above average posters but no where near the level of P5, so they get ten numbers.


So you're chart will look like this:
[th]Poster[/th][th]Roll #s[/th]

P1	1 thru 5
P2	6 thru 10
P3	11 thru 15
P4	16 thru 20
P5	21 thru 35
P6	----
P7	36 and 37
P8	38 thru 47
P9	48 thru 57
P10	58 thru 67

Roll 1d67 and see who comes up. Everyone still has a chance only those that contribute more, get more of a chance.

 [dice]1d67[/dice]

P9's setting is chosen.

I like this suggestion.

As for why I have not submitted my own campaign, I couldn't find time before the first deadline to make what I felt was a proper writeup, and after the deadline I kinda stopped trying.  I was under the impression that we would be told when another round of entries would be selected, so I could enter then.  As soon as I finish with Midterms (tomorrow) I will complete my writeup and submit.

[Poseptune]

Hee hee, your quote changed my die roll, now I look like a moron than can't use a table lookup... :(



 ;)

[Ishmayl-Retired]

I like that, Poseidon.  So, here's how I would divvy up the point values:

0 Points - A person who has never contributed to the site in any way, and has seemingly only joined just to submit a Showcase.  (Not very likely, but I suppose it could happen).

1 Point - A person who was once an active member of the community, but has since been absent, or a person who has never contributed to anyone else's setting - only creates for his own setting.

3 Points - A person who posts sporadically, and occasionally disappears, but then comes back and posts and contributes to the site.  This person has probably reviewed, in depth, at least one other setting on the site that isn't his own.

5 Points - An average poster on the site - One who contributes to several meaningful discussions, updates his own setting fairly regularly, and has reviewed in depth several other settings on the site that aren't his own.

10 Points - An above-average contributor who is known for often lending a helping hand to anyone who asks.  His setting is well-detailed and often updated, and his name shows up often in other peoples' setting threads with useful advice or honest critiques.

Possible Additional Points:
1 Additional point for every three months that the person has been a regular contributor to the site.

1 Additional point for every month in which the person's submitted setting has not been showcased (I see this as a way to potentially force rotation for those that just keep getting bad luck).

Thoughts?

[Ishmayl-Retired]

Seraphine, I apologize if it wasn't obvious that you can submit at any time.  That first deadline was simply to be able to get showcased for that first month.  I will reword the guidelines, and I look forward to seeing your setting.

[Jharviss]

It's complicated but fair, which means that I'm in great support.  Complicated but fair is the best.

I know that I didn't immediately apply for Tephra because I wanted to get to a certain point before I submitted it to be showcased.  I wanted to reach a benchmark.  However, having spent three years working on Aldreia, I've learned that reaching those "benchmarks" tend to never happen.  

I think a lot of people are the same way.  They want to get to a certain point before they get a lot of people viewing their setting.  They want to feel comfortable with it being put in the spotlight.  They also want to feel like they deserve it.

All of these reasons make it hard for people who don't feel like their setting is complete (or, at that, anywhere near complete).  

That's just the thought-process behind it.  Fixing the problem?  Well, you're doing that just by bringing it up in these here forums.  I've already pointed out to a couple people that I'd like to see their settings showcased, and I think we should all do that.  Have a favorite setting?  Poke the owner into applying for a showcase.  

Yes yes.

[Kindling]

Favourite setting.. hmm... wouldn't it be a pleasant ego-boost for us all if we each listed a favourite setting or two? Just a thought...

[Ishmayl-Retired]

It could be.  I could be an ego downer too if someone never sees their setting show up. :)

[Seraph]

Seraphine, I apologize if it wasn't obvious that you can submit at any time.  That first deadline was simply to be able to get showcased for that first month.  I will reword the guidelines, and I look forward to seeing your setting.

Well, I understand now, so that's all that matters.  I will, of course, be submitting Avayevnon. I've mused a bit about other things here and there, but nothing else even has more than a few pages' worth for the whole setting.

[Lmns Crn]

As for the first question, I'm not sure why people aren't submitting settings. I'm postponing my submission until the summer because I'm swamped with work for grad school (also my excuse for recent lapses in activity here), but I am looking forward to having the time to really enjoy working on the Jade Stage again. If it came up for Showcasing now, I'd have no time to really relish it, so I'm waiting.

Being Showcased ought to be a reward in itself, really. If you're having problems getting numbers of submissions up, I'm not sure why that could happen (unless everybody else is waiting until summer, too-- unlikely.)

But getting more submissions won't help with the second problem.

I don't think you will arrive at a system that can please everybody. A weighted system, or any system involving votes or choice or anything like that, will lead (understandably) to accusations of favoritism. A random system will lead to complaints that there isn't any favoritism, when perhaps there ought to be. Both complaints have merit. A weighted roll isn't ideal, but it combines both elements, and it might be as good as it's going to get.

I have a suggestion about the rating system. One other reason I haven't submitted the Jade Stage yet is that it's already been Showcased (twice.) I think people who haven't been showcased yet should be given preference. Perhaps this could be taken into account with your weighting system, with a bonus added to the roll for people whose work has not yet been Showcased?

Favourite setting.. hmm... wouldn't it be a pleasant ego-boost for us all if we each listed a favourite setting or two? Just a thought...

One nice thing about Showcases is when the setting being featured is something I don't know, and it provokes me to read something new. If the Showcase is something I already know with enough familiarity to call it a "favorite," then what am I gaining by reading and reviewing it again? If it's my favorite, I've probably already done so.

[Hibou]

There can be different reasons why people may be absent or unable to contribute to more than their own stuff (and even that can be stifled) too, and this may want to be considered. The past few months' worth of events for me is a good example, with the chemo treatments and surgery and all.

That being said, the only reason I haven't already submitted Vilydunn or Haveneast is because I don't feel they're ready. Vilydunn may be, but it's been a showcase in the distant past and I haven't done much more than edit it since then. Haveneast definitely isn't prepared - there is a lot more I need to explain.