Fair play internal agreement
Guys, since we have discussed already few times that most of us would like to have jury on jovoto in order some problems to be overcomed, I'd like to propose something we could do as a workaround for now, and with common forces. The problems I'd like to target are namely:
-
sometimes the ideas are rated too quick, even some of them don't match the brief. The reason is that the voters not always have the incentive to spend enough time to read thoroughly the brief and the concept of the solution for rating
-
sometimes the ideas don't get equal amount of votes - the reason about that is similar to the previous one
-
sometimes one and the same people vote often for each other and the newest jovotans don't get enough attention to their ideas
-
the competitors not always vote unbiased, and this may influence your everall rating seriously
We all know these problems and it's not nice to face them when you have put some efforts on your idea. So here is what I'd like to propose: let's make a comminity fair-play agreement, which will settle some simple rules how to rate better each other's works! Here is what I'm proposing:
- When you vote for someone's work, please provide at least some
brief constructive comment.
This will show your vote is serious - if you have spent 5 min to read the concept, it won't be so hard for you to spent a minune more for brief feedback - When someone have commented your work, please, return him the
favour and spend some time to vote for his/her ideas asap, with
constructive comments, too.
- If you vote/comment someone's idea, no need to state what is
your valuation - just vote honestly and comment, that's
enough.
- When the people vote/comment your idea, return the favour
considering their order
- If you vote/rate someones idea and you'd like his evaluation urgently( for instance your project deadline is comming soon), don't hesitate to write him a message - it's not spam, it's collaboration, if we talk about serious votes
I tihnk If we agree about these simple principles, we could
assure we will get the same attention we give to the others.
That's fair enough, I think - you give some amount of your time and
get the same from the others. Please, let me know what do you
think!
If you agree with this proposal, please send it to your friends and followers, and drop a comment here you share the same ideas
Best Regards,
l.o.d
Comments are currently closed for this discussion. You can start a new one.
2 Posted by Paula Köhler on 06 Dec, 2010 02:36 PM
I can say this is appealing - so you as an jovoto member get more openminded across the submitted ideas and also take the brief in considering. I agrree it only takes 5 min to read a brief.
People need to be openminded both sides and not take positive critism personal. At the end it is only meant to guide to make the best of your design and push yourself in another direction.
There could be one more wish - that there could be more control of the uniqueness of the ideas that are submitted - there are alot of times where people loan a little to much from others that have submitted ideas first. Those people do not get the credit - and the ones who got inspired get rated higher and are mostly not very openminded when they get confronted with it.
Would be nice if people would take a look before they submit their idea - before making their own. It would respect the other contestants.
Just my thought here on this. Curious how it turns out.
God conversation start here you got land_of_dreams.
Greets,
Grafotopia
3 Posted by Tao Ma on 07 Dec, 2010 12:45 AM
First I think the points is real happen! And I really agree with people can take a look before submit their ideas, because really has so many similar ideas , we need protect the first owner!
thanks your suggestion land_of_dreams
4 Posted by zap on 07 Dec, 2010 10:54 AM
Your initiative is very good. But i think, some general problems cant’t be solved:
If some people don’t take a little time, to read briefings and concepts before voting, they also won’t take time to read a »fair-play-manifesto«.
Even if they do, there are still lots of factors, that endanger a »fair« voting – either wittingly or unwittingly (friendships, multiple accounts, anonymus mid-range-votings, mutuality agreements, judging visuals prior to concepts, personal likes and dislikes, lack of time, size of personal network, lack of judging skills, …)
An independent jury might be a solution. But a professional and independent jury would require a lot of time (= money). And the community does this work for free … ;)
5 Posted by Holly McAlister on 07 Dec, 2010 04:56 PM
Well it's a good start. I've been a little turned off lately from Jovoto because of the rating changes. It seems like things have changed a bit. I think having to leave a comment before rating it is a great idea. At least we can see why we were voted a certain way, we do put in a lot of time into our ideas and then they are thrown aside at times, good ideas nonetheless! but that's just my opinion. :) thanks for bringing up the topic landofdreams.
6 Posted by Moshart on 07 Dec, 2010 07:31 PM
here is a fair-play button for the avatar. :)
7 Posted by Janne on 07 Dec, 2010 09:20 PM
Is this the new complaint board?! I don´t see why it´s necessary to start another discussion board on fair rating, as we already have one and it´s quite tiring to read all those arguments over and over again.
It´s true, that some reaction from the jovoto team is missing, but I think that we should contact them directly and not keep complaining in front of each other...
@ Mosh: wearing a "fair"-tag doesn´t necessarily make you fair. If you only started to show the love you are constantly talking about, this would be the first step...
8 Posted by our creativity is our power!:) on 07 Dec, 2010 09:24 PM
@ Zap: That's exactly why we should build a strong fair-play committiee as if we have strong community of supporters, the negative models will be difficult to resist. Let say you engage 20 or 50 fair comments and votes to your idea. How many people you think could attack you with 'artificial' accounts or with mutual agreements. I guess no more than the people you could engage with meaningfull votes.
@ Anna Nuthathang, zomatao and Paula: Thanks for your support, guys. You could add now the green logo MoshArt have made for us in the way you find most suitable for you:)
BR,
l.o.d
9 Posted by our creativity is our power!:) on 07 Dec, 2010 09:32 PM
@Janne: I'm only aiming to bring the interests of the fair-players together and find the most suitable for all of us way to oppose to the negative things we all have seen so far. It's like in the society - in every strong country the active communities are always important factor for keeping some democratic values sustainable and opposing to their violation. Someday jovoto will probably change the system so its vulnerabilities will decrease, but it's not bad while we are waiting anyway to start doing some helphul things.
If someone declares he'll play fair, but we see he doesn't - we could always act accordingly. I tihnk it's again easier if the interests of the fair-players are united:)
10 Posted by Moshart on 07 Dec, 2010 09:53 PM
@ janne: really? damn, i'm not twelve! whan i wear a bayern munich shirt i'm also not a player, but a supporter. I'm new here on jovoto and i don't know who is bored talking about fairness. land wrote a mail to me and i had the idea to make a small button for the supporters. thats all. and you can be sure - i'm fair!
und mach doch die sache nicht schlecht. is doch ne gute sache. auch wenn es vielleicht schon viele andere gruppen in dieser art gibt. ich find das gut.
11 Posted by Janne on 08 Dec, 2010 08:33 AM
@land_of_dreams: Don´t get me wrong - I am always a strong supporter of fairness, but I think the way you want to force this, is not very wise.
First, you won´t change anything with your declaration or even Mosh´s stickers. It might even make it easier for those who deliberately cheat...
Second, I think you´ll only polarize with your action. I know, that there are quite a lot of freelancers on jovoto, who simply don´t have the time to follow a discussion like that, but work professionally and vote fair nonetheless. Do you want to label them as unfair, simply because they don´t belong to your klan?
I beg you to rethink your method. Something that has worked fine for me in the past, was writing those I suspected as being unfair a pm - in many cases they rethought their behaviour and cancelled their bashing. When this didn´t work, I wrote to jovoto and told them about their behaviour. Jovoto always reacted and I have already seen some voting being cancelled...
So I simply want to encourage you to concentrate on fair commenting and voting instead of putting all your energy in discussions about it... ;o)
Wishing you all the best,
Janne
12 Posted by skype: c.lubo on 09 Dec, 2010 03:15 AM
Well. One solution to avoid a problem land mentioned is to have a X-Day-Countdown after the briefing has been opened: The members read the briefing, then they make their thoughts and ideas on the task, design something and not until after X days have passed they can finally upload their comlpete ideas. Not just fragments. This will avoid overquick uploading.
As for the voting: the same procedure. The members can vote when a certain amount of ideas have been uloaded or not until x days. Sometime people fall in love with an idea because the other two that has been uploaded are worse and you just think someone found the holy grail. When afterwards better/proper ideas come up, the people mostly don't rethink their previous voting, although in comparison to the new ideas the first loved idea is not the holy grail anymore.
And as for sticking to the briefing, well, this can have serveral reasons: 1. People don't know how to read a briefing. 2. They don't giva a damn shit about it and upload an (sometimes really cool, but not fitting) idea to make a quick buck. 3. The briefings are too complicated to some people and Jovoto has to think about writing them more, well how to say it, idiot-proof, more concrete on what is wanted AND what is not wanted/needed and act. This would automatically augment the quality of the submissions, and this is good for the client and for jovoto's reputation.
And my opinion about sticking to the briefing, well, visit my account. And let's talk about something less enervating...
ciao.
adrian.
Support Staff 13 Posted by Nadine Freischlad on 15 Dec, 2010 02:58 PM
hi folks, love this initiative and, even though it stings a little to hear your complaints, it's good you are pushing on for some changes to make rating less of a battlefield.
Adrian has brought a new issue up in this thread:
Too cpmplicated briefings: noted. We have gone a little experimental lately, but concepts like parallel contests and contests building upon other ideas may require too much research beforhand and may be in the end limiting creativity in one's own work. Will be re-thought.
as to the idea of only letting submissions happen on day-x, adrian could you repost it in this thread? http://support.jovoto.com/discussions/discussion-visual-vs-conceptu...
There's already a collection of suggestions floating around over there.
I see your point in suggesting this, but imo it takes away too much of the positive effect of learning from each other in the process. perhaps if your dashboard would tell you in a more efficient way which ideas have been updated and might need a reconsideration of rating?
And, if you haven't already, you may want to read into my last reply on what we think we can do to ease the problem and why we on't believe in installing judges at every contest, which can also be found in this thread:
http://support.jovoto.com/discussions/discussion-visual-vs-conceptu...
@Anna: sad to hear. we have been missing you.
14 Posted by Paula Köhler on 10 Jan, 2011 04:42 PM
@adrian - You got some good points here -@nadine glad to see it goes further. I agrree that people make an effort and update their idea to the next level - they are often forgotten. The ones who have nailed it from the start often do not change their ideas because they think they are save and ready to win the 1st price and no need for change.
But even a good idea could use a makover.
I also often think that if people have a big network and sent messages to each other - they hope to get a higher rate.
I also have experienced people just sent me messages so that I can vote for their idea, and I alway rethink and have a look before I vote or do not vote - it would be nice if people really make a thought of does this idea fits to the task and i give it a fair vote - Or do I just support my mate no matter how the idea looks like?
jvanboxtel closed this discussion on 04 Feb, 2011 09:27 AM.