Congrats New #1

[borg]

@Spacemunkie:

Like I said, the top 10 is tabulated once a day. I suspect that when the scores were tabulated, she must have had higher scores, and she has been voted down since then.

 

[frenchkid]

Wow, talk about getting worked up about scores. You know in my opinion scores are never going to be somthing precise, we\'re dealing with art, how could it be ??? Just view it as a general view of how good you are, and use it to motivate yourself to improve. But getting worked up about a couple of ranks as no sens IMHO. Especially in the top 50, at that level of art scores don\'t mean that much. It\'ll be like trying to rank picasso, matisse, mondrian, and all those great painters to define witch one is the best. There is no \'best\' in art, some people might think alexi is number 1, will other will have there own number 1. And the fact that you are ranked 1st or 3rd isn\'t going to make you better then number 10. Well that\'s just my opinion anyway.

 

[Legacy Account]

It\'s probably just the unbeatable mix of beautifully painted minis and softcore porn that has bumped up the scores....

 

[borg]

I am still fairly convinced that her change in position is due to an audit where a large number of abnormal low scores were dropped rather than a new bunch of high scores were entered.

 

[EricJ]

was there 2 audits in the last week, Saturday night (when she first jumped from 9.61 to 9.69 before settling back to 9.65) and last night (when she jumped up to 9.73) that would drop scores from the last few months while at the same time increasing her vote counts significantly?

I\'m sorry it doesn\'t add up.

And frenchkid I agree, the score doesn\'t matter on it\'s own, what does matter is cheeting, which is one thing I have little patience for. And how the scores ARE very valuable is because the motivate us all to push ourselves to improve our painting because to get those better scores. So when a top painter can just act as though she is above the system, it ruins it all. Why should I try harder to improve my scores?

I think the scoring system while not perfect is a key part of this site, and is not worth giving up to stroke one egotists ego.

 

[borg]

I agree, there is no way that it was audited twice in such a short span. I don\'t personally monitor each person\'s score, so I don\'t know when the swing happens.

 

[frenchkid]

Then consider alexi just removed all posibility to push herself. Beeing number 1 she has nothing to aim for now.

 

[EricJ]

Are there audits that focus on a single persons score and go back further than a day? I know there is something that seems to happen every night about the same time as the top list is updated where low scores are taken out from that day, but not a more in depth process which goes over just 1 person and takes out lower scores from further back as well. I did notice that there was basically no change to anyone else in the top 20 so is that is the case Alexi must just be the lucky one. How does one get so lucky to get that more in depth audit?

(I know you probably can\'t answer, but I was curious, thought I\'d ask)

PS Borg, I am of course not blaming you for any of this, please don\'t take anything I\'m saying as an attack on you, it is not ment as such. I really appreciate all the work and effort you put into this place to make sure it keeps working right.

 

[EricJ]

Originally posted by frenchkid
Then consider alexi just removed all posibility to push herself. Beeing number 1 she has nothing to aim for now.

in my opinion that\'s one of the worst things about the whole situation honestly, I want Alexi to push herself to up her game, she does paint nice minis but there is a lot she can learn, technically she\'s top of the game, but to me she\'s lacking \"life\" in a lot of her work. When I see a mini of hers I see a wonderfully painted mini, I don\'t see an elf, or a horse, etc... If she can learn to capture that, then she would have something...

 

[borg]

I really can\'t answer your question as it will give away too much. But let\'s give it an example. If your images is hosted externally, and it continuously loads slow or fails to load for x number of times, it will flag, and we will be notified. So things can happen on a universal basis or on an individual basis based on data obtained.

 

[EricJ]

I understand Borg, I didn\'t expect you\'d be able to give out the answers to those questions.

Sorry to everyone if I am seeming a bit too worked up about this, but there are few things that really rub me the wrong way, and this is one of them. So when something does get me upset...I\'m not good at being quiet. :innocent:

 

[Anatora]

Originally posted by borg
I really can\'t answer your question as it will give away too much. But let\'s give it an example. If your images is hosted externally, and it continuously loads slow or fails to load for x number of times, it will flag, and we will be notified. So things can happen on a universal basis or on an individual basis based on data obtained.

I am new to the boards, but I have a question/observation. From what you have said in the posts on this subject, I gather the process is essentially this: If.... I submit a (or several) mini(s) and it (they) receive(s) quite a few consistent high scores from painting challenged viewers, and then the more level headed voters give it quite a number of low scores, all I have to do to get the system to kick in on my \"individual basis\" is to encouage people not to vote with high marks, but with very low marks, preferablly 1s. When I receive too many \"1\'s\", the system intervenes and removes not only the low marks I encouraged, but also the low marks from the sane voters as well, allowing my mini(s) to rise in the miniature rankings as well as in the overall ranks? Or is this farfetched?

 

[Klute]

So a load of 10\'s or 1\'s on a mini will flag it.
On a figure with average 9 the 1\'s will be dropped but the 10\'s should be left cos its within reason.
But if like Eric says there were 100 10\'s in a day or 2 then this must raise suspicion and warrant looking into.
???

 

[Molebrain]

huh

Seems like it would be easy enough to tell if the spike was caused by fake votes, or it it fell to earth because of sniping.

Did she have a large number of votes right before she went up, or did she have a large number of votes after she went up?

If before, seems fishy for sure. If after, then maybe Borgs faith in our ability to drag each other down would be verified.

Zach

 

[borg]

Well, I can certainly understand your concerns, as there was virtually no change in the #1 position in years. It is a big deal. There are hundred of thousands of painters all over the World, and this is about the only place for you to compare your skills on a global basis painting whatever you like.

I do think that everyone ln the top 10 list are celebs of sorts and all have their own fan base, so I would expect a lot of voting in the coming days/weeks. I think the scores will stabalize again very soon.

 

[borg]

Hmmm... remember at the beginning of the thread, I had a cached version showing Alexi in 3rd place.

2411 votes, 24067 views

and now it shows her in first place.

2388 votes, 24237 views

so there is surely a decrease of votes rather than an increase, so it is a clear case of votes being prunes and not a case of heavy voting.

 

[EricJ]

what I\'m speaking of is before this thread started, the reason for this thread.

Perhaps she had be sniped down some since taking over the top spot, but that wasn\'t the issue, the issue is how she took over the top spot

just doing a little quick math, at the level Alexi was (with score and # of votes), the difference between 9.60 (where she was a week ago) and 9.73 is about 300 consecutive tens. While to drop that much is about 25 ones (which may have been what just got taken out and reflected in your numbers you just put up)

of course if there was new mini in there to boost the score I would understand, however there isn\'t

 

[borg]

I never implied that this thread is the cause, I apologise if I did. I was just saying that in the recent weeks, months, between her arguements with Margo, the CCV debate and various other threads might have contributed to her being a target so to say. But as the stats have indicated, there are no increase number of votes that is measurable, only abnormal votes have been pruned and hence her new #1. Not a case of heavy voting in a short period of time as suggested.

 

[Molebrain]

true

It\'s true that you would need to know the total votes before she jumped up to accurately make that comparison. A total of 23 votes- even if they were all ones, according to eric\'s math, wouldn\'t justify the change.

There\'s no log of vote totals from say- a few days ago?

Zach

 

[borg]

I don\'t have access to the logs, but if someone is to spam votes to increase score, there will be an increase in total votes not decrease. It could just be a case of the votes being pruned and a few good votes.