Last Call: Arena Feedback (Updated Friday) !3

[Kuyusi]

I really enjoy the look of the new arenas, as well as the navigation.

My only qualm is that it is obvious that sub-par winners are taking 1st, 2nd and so on. I don't know how this is happening, but if you guys have truly randomized the spotlight, hopefully we'll be getting quality winners once more.

[Starla Mitsubushi]

the Pm notification of you deleting your own comments is not an good idea. It is actually annoying...can we have some way of disabling that feature?

[keiiii]

Regarding top rated posts

Art arena could really benefit from a "popular posts" page WITHOUT all these super old submissions from 2003, 2004, etc. Most of the times, artists would rather get exposure/comments on newer works. Either filter out old stuff from the "top rated posts" page, or make a new page that contains top rated works that are reasonably new (less than one month old? less than one week old?).

PS. does 640x640 really have to be the maximum size? crying Can't it be bigger, or at least taller?

[Kuyusi]

That's a good point.
Being able to adjust the size of your image (to a limit, like in signatures) would be nice. Especially since a lot of people don't have a square-shaped image, so they end up either having a squashed or stretched image.

[Mario Kinnikuman]

Regarding the Avatar Arena, I'm sure this suggestion has been proposed before; I only wish to advocate for it. I think there ought to be a certain number of votes necessary to achieve a spot in the top ten. What I worry about is that still, avatars might place at the week's conclusion, only receiving roughly 100 - 300 votes. It isn't enough, frankly. Previous winners have earned up to approximately 2,000 votes at the culmination of the week. What I suggest is that no avatar is permitted to place unless they garnered at least 1,000 votes. Therefore, we can get a solid opinion on the avatar according to what a wider, more diverse audience thinks, and not solely by the groups of individuals who are biased for or against the avatar itself.

[elf_star]

1000 votes seems like way too much, especially since any avatar I've entered hasn't even been rated 500 times. Personally, I think 100 votes should be sufficient enough.

[Mario Kinnikuman]

elf_star

1000 votes seems like way too much, especially since any avatar I've entered hasn't even been rated 500 times. Personally, I think 100 votes should be sufficient enough.

100 votes cannot truly reflect the overall opinion of the thousands of Gaians that visit the Avatar Arenas, though. The first place winners of this week demonstrate this.

92 votes. Haven't we already experienced this similar scenario before in weeks 48, 49 and 50, when few people vote on an avatar during the competition spanning the whole week, thus resulting in unusually high averages for the avatar? Do you think this avatar still might have won, or placed as high, if it had been more rigorously critiqued by 1,000 votes, instead of a meager 92?

The more 5's an avatar has, but with the least amount of total votes, shouldn't entail the criteria for winning. This pattern is becoming quite apparent, and is evidenced in the winners of previous weeks, including the submission above.

------

Week 48:

Original Arena: Riya (Times Voted: 12) - (Average: 5.00)

Week 49:

Original Arena: Demonic Cabbage (Times Voted: 12) - (Average: 5.00)
Cosplay Arena: Left4Dead Custom Avi (Time Voted: 12) - (Average: 5.00)

Week 50:

Original Arena: Inari Rouge Kunochi Tio (Times Voted: 86) - (Average: 4.82)
Cosplay Arena: Bippity Boppity Boo! (Times Voted: 306) - (Average: 4.70)

------

Again, out of the several thousands of Gaians that visit the Avatar Arenas, avatars that win after only acquiring a maximum of a dozen to a few hundred votes when the week ends is rather inadequate, and undermines the trouble of those who've undergone and survived the full process of the public's test. I fail to see how 12 - 306 votes constitutes a coherently thorough critique.

------

This submission has earned its spot, since it has convinced a multitude of voters; 1,097, with varying opinions, and not just those who'd automatically feel predisposed to reward it with a 5 for appealing to their interests, alone. Compared to the Original Arena winner, there is sufficient feedback from a wider, more diverse audience to more accurately determine the true excellence of this submission.

By implementing the feature of a vote count requirement, we can significantly increase the likelihood of submissions which do deserve acknowledgment, according to the public's response, to reach their full potential. I believe 1,000 vote still ought to be the minimum necessary, since by the end of the week, most thoughtful submissions will be rated at least 1,000 times.

[elf_star]

I understand what you're saying, but unless they can ensure that each avatar has been rated 1000 times, I don't want such a thing to be implemented into the system. After all, I'd hate to be the person who receives 900 votes and a high average, only to be outranked by someone who has 1000 votes, but has a lower average than me.

[Mario Kinnikuman]

Personally, I still believe it should be 1,000 votes minimum, but I'm sure the topic is open to negotiation. If 1,000's too high for some, and conversely 100's too low for others, a logical compromise would be 500. I just think we need to implement such a system to decrease the probability of repeating the mistakes of several weeks prior. It won't guarantee, but it will certainly decease the likelihood.

[Fairchilde]

With all these problems, I genuinely see no improvements except with the split of the cosplay and original sections.

Simply put: What was so wrong with the old arenas?

Seriously, we do NOT need 20 winners. Have 5 original, 5 cosplay, and we're good. The new spotlight doesn't seem to work. I mean, the old one never showed us anything popular, and when we do see "popular" avatars, it's biased.

And worse: People have NOT been getting their gold. You pay 1,000 gold expecting a chance to win.

And even more stupid, the avatars we vote on are blown-up versions. How are we supposed to make a winning entry when the final result will be blown up for no good reason? People aren't blind, they aren't stupid, and that's not the way we view avatars in Gaia, blown up to about 200%.

And 500 votes is a lot. I'm sorry, thousands of people may -visit- the arena but not as many vote. I completely understand, the averages are ridiculous and trash can win with 12 votes, but 500 is a bit much. I know we're going to fight on it, I just had to say so.

What was SO wrong with the old system? It worked for years. You want to split original and cosplays? Fine, that was cool. But why a huge, unnecessary overhaul?

I understand that the mods work hard and feedback is disheartening but something's rotten here. People aren't getting their gold. : I don't like being left in the dark. I don't expect frequent updates, just... I know I'm not the only one.

[Mario Kinnikuman]

Fairchilde

And 500 votes is a lot. I'm sorry, thousands of people may -visit- the arena but not as many vote. I completely understand, the averages are ridiculous and trash can win with 12 votes, but 500 is a bit much. I know we're going to fight on it, I just had to say so.

The lowest number I'm comfortable settling at is 300 votes, but 500 is my preference. It's a reasonable amount that can't be surpassed easily at the outset of the week, but should be eventually, especially towards the end. Most decent, and sometimes shoddy, avatars should accumulate at the bare minimum, 300 votes, such as week 50's Blippy Boppity Boo cosplay winner. Additionally, it will force any entrants that deliberately hope for as fewest votes possible with most fives, to reveal themselves. They'll need to request that others, besides their mule accounts and friends, must vote for them in order to meet the requirement for earning a winner's spot.

[Deazy]

I think the randomizer needs another look at. We had 5 cosplays win the original arena this week and all of them had very little comments which says they also had very little votes.

I believe they were "invisible" to the general public so they didn't get reported for moving.

[Mario Kinnikuman]

Deazy

I think the randomizer needs another look at. We had 5 cosplays win the original arena this week and all of them had very little comments which says they also had very little votes.

I believe they were "invisible" to the general public so they didn't get reported for moving.

I suspect that the presence of more avatars in the Spotlight saturates the rotation; it'll rotate submissions more often, thus, avatars are only managing to gather a few votes since they're displayed briefly for a couple of minutes before being rotated out.

If there was a system to ensure that all avatars, once rotated in the spotlight, could not rotate out until obtaining, say for example, 20 votes, then perhaps that might solve the problem. The process repeating henceforth, when an avatar rotates into the spotlight again.

--------------------------

I'm also wondering if displaying the vote count of avatars in the Arenas for the public to view, after the contest ends, would be feasible. We already have the vote count shown for the first place winners in both the Original and Cosplay sections, so why not everyone else? I don't sense the harm which could arise from it, not unless entrants have something to hide...

[Sliptrall]

I agree with Mario Kinnikuman. You should have a minimum amount of votes to win. 500 at least.
And the tabs... A randomized one would be good- and another tab I liked is the "last commented" option. It was nice to see avatars that stood out.

I personally liked the "most popular" one because once I got listed there one time I won. XP
But it wasn't really fair, I suppose.

I do like how you separated them. Original and Cosplay is nice. ^^ I'd suggest making the definitions of each a little more clearer, though. There's a lot of threads in the forum of "which arena should I be in?"