Posted: 04 September 2005 at 8:37pm | IP Logged

HEY,EVERYONE!!!

SEEM TO ME I WAS LATE TO SOME REAL TOPICAL TOPICS...

MY PROPOSITION-DROP THE 10,9,8...POINT SYSTEM.

PEOPLE SHOULD WRITE A CONSTRUCTIVE ADVISES AND NOT BEING SURROUNDED BY SOME FALSE OR TRUE NUMBERS!!!

I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE: one of my tracks" Battle for London" was having 10 out of 5 votes and everyone could see it on the main page for a days...then one day it became 9 out of 6 votes-AND WITHOUT ANY COMMENT!!!!

SO WHAT I'M TELLING THAT-I DON'T GIVE A FLYING RAT'S ASS ABOUT NUMBERS,BUT IF THEY EXIST-NO ONE SHOULD INSAULT OTHER MUSICIANS BY USING THIS PARTICULAR SYSTEM.

GO AND WRITE SOME GOOD MUSIC,POST IT HERE,WRITE A REVIEW FOR SOMEBODY AND DON'T TALK TOO MUCH!!!!!!!

LOVE AND PEACE TO ALL

Posted: 04 September 2005 at 9:32pm | IP Logged

This is really a shame.. someone votes, and brings down the average and he doesn't even leave a comment explaining why he doesn't find this a 10. I repeat myself saying that this songs represents what trance should be!! This song should still be #1!!
      zenthai - 04 September 2005

there you go!!!!!

it is about the song that has reached second place in this week charts!!!!

no need to add nothing to it...

Posted: 04 September 2005 at 9:38pm | IP Logged

http://www.mp3unsigned.com/Showmp3.asp?mp3id=20099&aid=1 843

have a listen to this great song and tell me how is that possible to give it less than 10????

so,gents let's ask the management to drop that system with those numbers,cos' we can never be sure of someone strange,who would do such nasty thing 

Posted: 05 September 2005 at 5:54am | IP Logged

Well, I agree with your dislike of the system abuse... However, it is not as easy to say 'Drop the system'. Unfourtunately, when a great deal of time and effort goes into developing a piece of software like Stew has here, it becomes an investment. Investors do not want to throw away a product because it has a defect. Also, when dealing specifically with software, a piece such as this has what are known as dependencies. Other systems that can be affected by such a change. The more desirable solution for both ends is to come to an improvement that requires little initial investment, and provides the desired result. In this case, my professional advice would be to add to the existing system some minimal pattern analysis capabilities. It would 'filter' and 'observe' system abuse. Then allow Stew (or other permitted administrators to 'rollback' votes that are abusive. Possibly even flag the user as a member no longer allowed to vote. This would probably require much less effort on Stew's part, maintain a reliable voting system, and stop offenders point blank. I did not make up this process however, most major financial intitutions (VISA,Mastercard) use a similar type of pattern analysis for spending habits. You will see the simularity after I explain further.

The current system:
When a vote is cast, a 'row' is inserted into a database table  containing the following; the user that clicked it (userID), the song they clicked on (SongID), the Time of the vote, and the vote value itself. There might be several other peices of information as well, but these are the important ones. One of the rules Stew has built in was that you can only vote for the same track once within a specific timeframe. There are several ways to make this happen, but I will not get toooo technical here... or soon I will be writing code to the forum.

When a song average rating needs to be calculated, it pulls all the 'rows' based on the Song ID, counts the songs, adds all the vote values, and then divides the vote values sum by the number of songs. It then rounds to the nearest half point. That is a summary of the current system.

Disdain's Rec.
I am not saying that I am all knowing, but I have done this specific kind of programming for a long time. And this would definately be on my desk at work. Here are a few of the filters you could put into place, without really disturbing the current process. I am not saying all of these are for MP3U, just options I would look at. 

Filter 1. (after initial three votes, most likely VIP's) the current vote is compared to the last 3 votes, and cannot fall less than 2 points below the lowest vote or the account will be flagged. The vote will still go through temporarly, but Stew will know the action. This will not stop all, but it is one safe guard.

Filter 2. Any vote of a 4 or lower (might already exist)

Filter 3. Any vote below 3 points of the current average.

These are just examples. Stew understands what he is doing, and the purpose of this was not to tell him how to do his job, but rather explain to you what he is going through with this system. If he rips this system out, it means rewriting the charts, and possibly several other systems. Instead I urge you to motivate Stew in the right way, by using the system the way it was intended. Boycotting the system will only make the abuser's votes mean more. I consider you a friend of mine Serge. You have always been very supportive of me, and of this site. I know you are frustrated, as we all are with this industry. But we cannot give in to the people doing this. Stew will work it out. And even though I am sure he is capable, he knows my services are always available to MP3U. This is all of our home, and we cannot tear it apart because we are upset.

Your friend... Dis 

Posted: 05 September 2005 at 12:00pm | IP Logged

VERY THOUGHTFULL AND CONSTRUCTIVE LETTER,DISSS!!!!!

HOPE MORE PEOPLE WOULD RESPOND TO THIS SCREAM.

Posted: 05 September 2005 at 12:48pm | IP Logged

thanks for being the voice of sanity for once  (kidding) Dis,

I am more than aware that the rating/user chart is not all it could be, and have been in discussion for ages with people as to how best to 'revamp' it.

I won't knee jerk, when I change it, it'll be because I am 100% happy with the changes I am going to make.

Posted: 05 September 2005 at 3:06pm | IP Logged

Nice writing Disss,

I agree with you in regards to improving an existing program but many after reading your thread might not want to attempt to vote based on your statement.

"Filter 1. (after initial three votes, most likely VIP's) the current vote is compared to the last 3 votes, and cannot fall less than 2 points below the lowest vote or the account will be flagged. The vote will still go through temporarly, but Stew will know the action. This will not stop all, but it is one safe guard."

For starters, this is ONLY my opinion and observation based on this voting system. 

Not everyone is the same, nor do they have the same tastes of music ie. genre   3 voters might vote a "10" due to personal taste and LOVE the track where as you might have someone who is not really into that style of genre but still appreciates the track as an interest.  I myself have different tastes than maybe someone who doesn't therefore their judgement and vote maybe clearly differ from mine.  They might vote a "10" where as I might vote an "8" which is not a bad thing yet, I would give a response to why I voted an 8 in the first place.

Other individuals have expressed in previous threads, "if you dont like the genre, then don't vote". That is not necessarily the case. Not all listeners here what others hear.

An example of this would be something to this nature:

3 listeners who flavour ? pop/rock vote a 10 with a comment such as, "this rocks", excellent dude but to me that means nothing other than they enjoyed listening to the track.  (this is a genre they flavour and love)  Myself as a listener may listen to the same track and vote an "8" which of course is not a bad score but would add, I like the track but feels the track requires more production skills, different lyrics or the lyrics don't do anything for me, the harmonies are off or the guitar rif sounds distorted, the vocalist is flat around the 01:25 mark, etc.  By voting an 8, I as the listener and voter would be flagged. 

I agree, everyone loves a 10 but not everyone should be giving a 10 as there is always room for improvement. 

I too have been reluctant to give ANY vote a 10 based on this theory but will instead leave a comment.  Make sense?

From past experience, I have noted that many of the comments left by voters leaving a 10 are  as such, "awesome', excellent, great! but then one voter will say 'the best I've heard in a long time and yet leave a vote of 9 or 8".  Some post a comment and other don't. 

My suggestion would be that if anyone is going to vote less then a 9 or 10 indicating the track requires improvement REQUIRE to leave a comment as to why they think this.  If they don't comment, then they either can't justifiy their reasoning and therefore by not commenting, delete their vote. 

Actually, another suggestion is when someone does vote, a page is prompt to ask 4 questions to which they have a click off an area of improvement.  i.e. Music, lyrics, vocals, production.  At least given the chance to click an area they feel needs improvement would at least give the artist an area to start with. If the listener wants to leave more comments he can do so with an area for comments.  Make sense?

Also, Adding to the voting system a question such as

1.  are you an active listener of this genre would indicate something to assist all voters and listeners

2. What area do you feel needs improvement?

This is only an opinion and an idea to assist with the present system as I do believe this topic has been posted not once but on a frequent basis.

I hope this gives some insight to other voters and artists for ways of improving the present system.

Mary

:-)

Posted: 05 September 2005 at 3:12pm | IP Logged

i just tend to ignore the numbers...

it's easy that way!