Open Polling

[impressive]

Lauren & I were discussing this yesterday over a drink at ABSTRUSIONS. We now have the option for open polling -- where you can click on the number of votes beside each choice and see who voted.

We were both of the opinion that open polling would make the year-end awards very, very interesting (and quite possibly cut down on cheating). What do you think?



EDITED: I made this poll open, so you could see what I was talking about. After you've voted (or when you click the link to "view results"), you'll see.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Lauren & I were discussing this yesterday over a drink at ABSTRUSIONS. We now have the option for open polling -- where you can click on the number of votes beside each choice and see who voted.

We were both of the opinion that open polling would make the year-end awards very, very interesting (and quite possibly cut down on cheating). What do you think?



EDITED: I made this poll open, so you could see what I was talking about. After you've voted (or when you click the link to "view results"), you'll see.

I think open polling would drive many people not to vote. If, for example Doc M was up for an award and Oggs was up for the same one, I would have a hard time choosing between them in the first place. If my choice were to be made public, I would probably not vote.

(I choose these two gents because I don't think either would be upset if I voted one way or the other and i doubt either will take ofense at being used as an illustration).

In any situation where I have friends invovled, I would hesitate to vote for one, as it might be percieved as voting against the other.

 

[matriarch]

I think open polling would drive many people not to vote. If, for example Doc M was up for an award and Oggs was up for the same one, I would have a hard time choosing between them in the first place. If my choice were to be made public, I would probably not vote.

(I choose these two gents because I don't think either would be upset if I voted one way or the other and i doubt either will take ofense at being used as an illustration).

In any situation where I have friends invovled, I would hesitate to vote for one, as it might be percieved as voting against the other.

I would hope that as friends, they would understand that my voting would have to be as it always has been.....fair and unbiased. I never give my vote to someone merely because they are a friend, and I never give 5's simply because they are a friend.

Integrity has to come into it somewhere.

IMHO

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I would hope that as friends, they would understand that my voting would have to be as it always has been.....fair and unbiased. I never give my vote to someone merely because they are a friend, and I never give 5's simply because they are a friend.

Integrity has to come into it somewhere.

IMHO

I agree totally, you have to be honest. That said, when I vote, I prefer a secret ballot, as it removes the "possibility" of hurting feelings.

 

[Guest]

personally, i dont give a flip.
but
in my opinion, voting for anything should be, by its nature alone, a private thing.
(im having a comma day)

 

[matriarch]

(im having a comma day)

'temporary hijack'.........then you will love my next poem when it posts. A plethora of commas will greet you upon opening. It's called 'Question', and this is a not-very-subtle plug.

'hijack over. back to the thread.'

 

[Guest]

 

[Liar]

What vella said.

Non anonymous voting has it's advantadegs and it's drawbacks. And I can't really decide if it's for better or worse. Instead, I would had wanted a poll that you didn't immediately see the result of the voting on, but that displayed that after the voting had ended.

#L

 

[Guest]

'temporary hijack'.........then you will love my next poem when it posts. A plethora of commas will greet you upon opening. It's called 'Question', and this is a not-very-subtle plug.

'hijack over. back to the thread.'

you know i love your schtuff... will read as soon as its up
[/threadjack]

yeah, what liar said!

 

[annaswirls]

okay I just voted and then looked at my name up there in public

it was not hard at all.

if a person cannot vote with honesty and with what they believe to be true, that is a sad day.

But when it comes to voting on a person for top this or that, it is a tougher call.

But I figure, everyone can nominate someone in public, right?

The only thing, when people nominated for the end of the year award, there was obvious questionable results ie 10 virgins with 1 post all voting for the same person. What would you do about that anyway?

 

[CharleyH]

What vella said.

Non anonymous voting has it's advantadegs and it's drawbacks. And I can't really decide if it's for better or worse. Instead, I would had wanted a poll that you didn't immediately see the result of the voting on, but that displayed that after the voting had ended.

#L

On this I agree. As for the rest, well, tricky question, but doesn't Laurel see who voted anyway, and therefore can offer unbiased insight upon tabulation?

 

[matriarch]

okay I just voted and then looked at my name up there in public

it was not hard at all.

if a person cannot vote with honesty and with what they believe to be true, that is a sad day.

But when it comes to voting on a person for top this or that, it is a tougher call.

But I figure, everyone can nominate someone in public, right?

The only thing, when people nominated for the end of the year award, there was obvious questionable results ie 10 virgins with 1 post all voting for the same person. What would you do about that anyway?

Hi Anna,

I agree, I don't have a problem seeing my name there as a votee.

But as for your last question.......indeed. It bothers me, really bothers me, partly that I'm suspicious enough to consider their voting as questionable, and partly that there does not appear to be any of verifying the status of all of them.

 

[Guest]

Open Polling
just sounds so promiscuous... and not just a little bit dirty.

 

[logophile]

I'm with the no's on this one.

All voting is sacred and private. No one should ever asked to disclose where their vote went.

Having not played with these polls much, I am pretty much clueless about how they work from a technical aspect. Is it possible for only the poll-starter to see the vote breakdown. That wouldn't be much different than emailing your votes in. Also, I've never tried to vote for something more than once (I really do take voting very seriously). Is it possible to do that? If so, is it also possible to disallow that?

 

[carsonshepherd]

On this I agree. As for the rest, well, tricky question, but doesn't Laurel see who voted anyway, and therefore can offer unbiased insight upon tabulation?

Absolutely, and since she runs the site so well, why shouldn't we trust her on that? I wanna change my vote...

 

[CharleyH]

okay I just voted and then looked at my name up there in public

You can see your name?

 

[carsonshepherd]

You can see your name?

click on the number of votes. it gives ya a breakdown.

 

[CharleyH]

click on the number of votes. it gives ya a breakdown.

Found it, just today lol, cool feature.

 

[Guest]

I don't know about anyone else but I have nothing to hide. And I don't hold grudges if someone votes for someone else. I might be more interested in reading the winners stories. I value the oppinions of a lot of people here in the AH, it would be good to know who they thought was the the best.

 

[rgraham666]

I really believe voting should be secret.

As Colleen noted making it public brings factors into play not related to the quality of writing. Which should be the main criteria we vote on.

I'm sure Laurel and Manu have plans in hand to deal with fraud.

 

[BlackShanglan]

The only thing, when people nominated for the end of the year award, there was obvious questionable results ie 10 virgins with 1 post all voting for the same person. What would you do about that anyway?

I really feel that we have to let go of this. I've managed somehow to get to know some readers who don't post on the AH or the GB, and frankly my impression is that there are quite a large number of them. Possibly even the majority. They have as much right to vote as anyone else. While perhaps one might see it as a little self-promoting for the author to tell them all that the nominations and/or votes are open, there's nothing wrong with letting them know when they would not otherwise be aware. I don't feel that their lack of postings on the boards makes them any less legitimate as readers.

Yes, there is a potential for unfairness. But there is equal potential for unfairness in assuming that any post by a "virgin" is suspect. Can we not simply remember that a nomination is a lovely compliment, that all voting is subjective, and that the chief goal here is that we all get read, we all learn to write better, and we all enjoy the process?

I think it's conducive to that process to keep the voting private. I know what my friends and fellow authors think of my work; I have their emails, PM's, and PC's. The opinions of random strangers are of considerably less interest to me, as I have no idea what their goals and standards are. I see no need to know who voted what, and some harm to come from it. I think it enough to know what a friend thought of my latest; it's only inviting awkwardness to have to know how s/he compared it to someone else's work.

Shanglan

 

[doormouse]

I've never seen an end of year comp, but totally agree.

Besides, she can check who's nick belongs to who.

No multiple votes. GO for it.

 

[oggbashan]

Useful or Not?

As far as the Year End awards are concerned, I am not bothered whether it would be an open or closed poll. I don't usually vote because I don't think I read widely enough in Literotica to make an informed choice.

However I think that there are some polls where an open version is useful for example on whether or not a particular writing technique is valid. Knowing that people you respect as writers have voted a particular way could give you more information than an anonymous poll. If someone new votes, you could follow the links to their work and see why they choose that option.

If it is a competition that is to be decided by the vote then perhaps anonymous voting is preferable.

Og

 

[oggbashan]

Readers V Writers

I am not concerned about apparent 'virgins' voting or nominating.

There are many people who come to Lit to read the stories and are not authors. There are some authors who 'lurk'. There are many people who feel inhibited by the forums. That does not mean that they do not have a valid viewpoint, nor that they may not have read widely in the stories.

I lurked for some time before posting. I sometimes lurk in the GB without contributing.

Why should someone who just comes here to read need to set up an identity unless they want to contribute? The stories are free and need no checks on your identity before you read. You only need an identity when you want to get involved. Warning: This place is addictive. Start to get involved and it may take over your life.

There are many prolific and highly rated authors who never appear in the AH. Does that affect the quality of their work or the regard that the majority obviously have for them? The Author's Hangout, and other fora, are occupied by only a very small sub-set of all the active authors in Literotica. Other people's views are just as valid as those expressed by the more vociferous of us, including me.

Og

 

[brightlyiburn]

Normally I would say no. I think Lit users who want to vote have a right to be anonymous if they want.
However, considering some of the reaction I've already seen this year, especially where I'm concerned, I'm going to say yes. One round of that was enough, thanks.