I tried.
I'm happy to vote or not vote, and I think we should just enjoy the challenge for what it is. I personally like cgeorg's simple adjustment to the rules, which just halves how often "experts" get to pick the winner, and gives more song choices to the other categories.
And play guitar, I like to play me some guitar.
I really like cgeorg's idea, I think that will get me to start participating in the weekly challenge sooner than I otherwise would.
Hi All - the night shift here again
I'm gonna try(!) and keep this short because I 'd like people to read it and I'd like us to move on. If you don't have time or just can't take any frickin' more just go to point 4.
1. People need to lay off Steel_Nirvana at a personal level (as I'd suggest for any poster). He may be somewhat robust in his expressions but at least he's trying to make something better based on his view of what's fair - particularly for beginners.
2. This is my interpretation of SN's central point: Beginners can't get to MM so they can only post 1 score. The stronger players can post 2 (XnMM and XMM without having to choose one of them). That's fundamentally different than foir the beginners who cannot.. IF different != fair then he has a point, but sorry, I don't agree this time. I'm of the view that it's an inescapable fact of life that some are stonger players. To force them into exclusiivel XMM is punitively restrictive. MM is a separate category but by switching it into a non-category I think we remove the concept of double-dipping yet allow people to stretch to their max on a side bet. The otnly people they'l be affecting are the other members of their pool.Let them at it I say...
I think that the proposed solution is sufficiently better (without being overly complex or restrictive) to warrant going forward. (Apologies to S_N if I mis-stated his position).
Edit: Maybe what would be cool is that if somebody does finally hit MM with a better score that becomes the community high that they come back to the thread and just post it if for no other reason than personal satisfaction. Eventually we'll be circling back to these songs anyway - there is not an inifinite supply of non-dlc. The rocksmith Buddy site is doing a great but right now at least it not yet the "site of record".
2. Nothing pisses me off more than the "Why worry, it just for fun" smother argument. This is complete horsepoo. Like Coop says, if you go to the bother of making a competition and putting a score on it then you owe it to everyone to make it fair and coherent. Just becasue you're happy with it doesn't necessarily make it either of those things. No doubt there'll be future iterations too.
3. The other thing that pisses me off are the people who add nothing to the discussion except to complain that "this is 24+ pages long - Aw whats all the yakkin' just play guitar". This is also code for "I like it how it is, stop making waves". An open process takes time and energy to discuss and fix if it needs fixinig. That's democracy and progress. If you don't like it just go (for want of a non-four letter verb) off and play your guitar - you don't have to read it.
Edit: Although I have to confess I'm approaching burnout myself on this iteration. And it's screwing with my work
KEY POINT!!!!
4. It is indeed time to **** or get off the pot. We have a workable proposition that seems to warrant a vote. I suggest that George frame his proposition in a new poll thread at his earliest convenience and we vote on it and move forward.If it doesn't suit him, then perhaps somebody else can do it. I'll do it. Whatever... Point is to do it if the mood is that we've taken this as far as we productively can for this iteration.
5. There is nothing stopping people starting a new thread with fresh propositions for another iteration which can be discussed by anyone who gives a ****. Thes can then be voted on at some point in the future too (not too soon though please). That's how it goes. If you don't want to take part in that fine. If you do fine. But nobody get's to own the competition or control who can say what or when so long what's said is ostensibly rational and civilised
Phew - I gotta get to work!
Last edited by KinchBlade; 05-23-2012 at 12:50 PM. Reason: Won't somebody think of the children?
I guess some of us will have to disagree with you on that. I'm amazed he is still allowed to post. It's not what he has to say, It is how he says it.Originally Posted by KinchBlade
Hi All - the night shift here again
I'm gonna try(!) and keep this short because I 'd like people to read it and I'd like us to move on. If you don't have time just go to point 4.
1. People need to lay off Steel_Nirvana. He may be somewhat robust in his expressions but at least he's trying to make something better based on his view of what's fair - particularly for beginners.
I agree with you on a lot of this. The competition is fun for a lot of people, and it works for them. That is good.
I still think the win/lose aspect of it is rubbish though. These community contests should not be about who wins. It should be about the song. I would love to see a thread devoted to the current song where people discuss strum patterns, rhythm, finger placement, and all sorts of other aspects of a given song. That could benefit everyone, and could be a wonderfully fun thread to take part in.
I hear what you're saying but I'm not going to derail this thread further especially by talking about another member. I just get worried when I think I see a lynch mob forming.
"I would love to see a thread devoted to the current song where people discuss strum patterns, rhythm, finger placement, and all sorts of other aspects of a given song. That could benefit everyone, and could be a wonderfully fun thread to take part in. "
This does happen - take a look at this week's competition thread - its a perfect example of that. It's great to see it.
Last edited by KinchBlade; 05-23-2012 at 10:13 AM.
I'm gonna keep this short and sweet as well.Hi All - the night shift here again
I'm gonna try(!) and keep this short because I 'd like people to read it and I'd like us to move on. If you don't have time or just can't take any frickin' more just go to point 4.
1. People need to lay off Steel_Nirvana at a personal level (as I'd suggest for any poster). He may be somewhat robust in his expressions but at least he's trying to make something better based on his view of what's fair - particularly for beginners.
2. This is my interpretation of SN's central point: Beginners can't get to MM so they can only post 1 score. The stronger players can post 2 (XnMM and XMM without having to choose one of them). That's fundamentally different than foir the beginners who cannot.. IF different != fair then he has a point, but sorry, I don't agree this time. I'm of the view that it's an inescapable fact of life that some are stonger players. To force them into exclusiivel XMM is punitively restrictive. MM is a separate category but by switching it into a non-category I think we remove the concept of double-dipping
I think that the proposed solution is sufficiently better (without being overly complex or restrictive) to warrant going forward. (Apologies to S_N if I mis-stated his position).
Edit: Maybe what would be cool is that if somebody does finally hit MM with a better score that becomes the community high that they come back to the thread and just post it if for no other reason than personal satisfaction. Eventually we'll be circling back to these songs anyway - there is not an inifinite supply of non-dlc. The rocksmith Buddy site is doing a great but right now at least it not yet the "site of record".
2. Nothing pisses me off more than the "Why worry, it just for fun" smother argument. This is complete horsepoo. Like Coop says, if you go to the bother of making a competition and putting a score on it then you owe it to everyone to make it fair and coherent. Just becasue you're happy with it doesn't necessarily make it either of those things. No doubt there'll be future iterations too.
3. The other thing that pisses me off are the people who add nothing to the discussion except to complain that "this is 24+ pages long - Aw whats all the yakkin' just play guitar". This is also code for "I like it how it is, stop making waves". An open process takes time and energy to discuss and fix if it needs fixinig. That's democracy and progress. If you don't like it just go (for want of a non-four letter verb) off and play your guitar - you don't have to read it.
Edit: Although I have to confess I'm approaching burnout myself on this iteration. And it's screwing with my work
KEY POINT!!!!
4. It is indeed time to **** or get off the pot. We have a workable proposition that seems to warrant a vote. I suggest that George frame his proposition in a new poll thread at his earliest convenience and we vote on it and move forward.If it doesn't suit him, then perhaps somebody else can do it. I'll do it. Whatever... Point is to do it if the mood is that we've taken this as far as we productively can for this iteration.
5. There is nothing stopping people starting a new thread with fresh propositions for another iteration which can be discussed by anyone who gives a ****. Thes can then be voted on at some point in the future too (not too soon though please
Phew - I gotta get to work!
1 - Steel_Nirvana, I apologize for calling you out yesterday. I don't personally like how the 'debate' turned yesterday nor the way I perceived your comments, but that doesn't give me the right to call you out and I am sorry for that. I do respect the fact that you are willing to take a stand for what you believe.
2 - You posted (2.) twice, so I'm referring to both of them here. The argument seems to be about the 'expert' group getting to post 2 scores and getting to select a song 2 weeks in a row. I think the key here is that some people view the current expert group as what advanced/intermediate used to be before they were split off... and they would like the masters of expert to be in a separate group from the rest of expert. Some people view xMM as a novelty and some view it as the next logical step in the game.
I think cgeorg's idea solves the double score and double song-selection problem, but not the competition of the masters vs the experts. I think my suggested tweak to cgeorg's idea (having a 5th group) would solve this problem.
This IS a friendly competition, but a competition nonetheless. The common consensus world-wide is that competition brings out the best in everyone as they strive to improve. We also have to maintain the fun/friendly side of it to keep everyone happy and keep this going.
3/4/5 - I do agree that we should get more input, but I can also understand why people don't necessarily want to jump into something like this. If I don't see something posted by noon today I will post a mock draft on here to make sure it looks good and then will post it live for voting.
Bugger I lost my post...
Please post a summary this was my last understanding....
1. Players are no longer categorised by how they can score on a song, players are categorised by membership of a Pool or Tier
2. The Pools have nothing to do with how one scores on any given song as was the pervious method, they contain those players who rank themselves at a level relative to all the other players on the board - Pool A - Top Players, Pool B - People who think they are not as good as pool A, Pool C - people who feel they are not as good as pool B. As far as Pool D.
3. All scores for a pool are ranked. There are no traditional score-related categories such as Beginner etc. within a pool - the pool is self-categorising.The top score is the winner of that pool for the week.
4. MM scores are not admissable for Pool Scoring purposes
5. A MM score can be generated for every pool. Any Player in Pool D ("Beginner" Pool) can have a good week, hit purple and go on to post a MM score. This gets bragging rights, nothing else.
6. MM is not a legitimate score for the competition, therefore highest MM scorer does not get to choose a song etc.
7. All Pools exist independently. The Winner from Pool A is not ranked higher than the winner from Pool D for example
That's what I had in my head. What have I missed?
Last edited by KinchBlade; 05-23-2012 at 02:53 PM.
You nailed it. 5 pools (or leagues), self-chosen, 1 counting score (non-mm).
Other things we can/should look at down the line:
* Considering how % & NS should affect final score (JTCoop's idea)
* Either self-police or a ruling on players that self proclaimed in the wrong pool/league based on amount/strength of wins (cgeorg's & KinchBlade's idea).
Ya cannot make these 2 comments and expect me, to not reply.
First, you may not be able to fathom it, but some people (me) can be in a competition just for the fun of it, and never expect to win. For us winning is just participating. This works, for free to participate competitions like this. When it quits being fun, then we are out, whether we could win or not. How we finish is important, we want to compare ourselves, but we don't have to be top dog.
Next, I'll agree with a previous poster, that is considered by many of us, to be a "it ain't broke, don't fix it" situation. Just because some folks think it is broken, does mean it is broken.
I heard they's a man there pays folks money to sing into a can.
rcolesooner's Channel
Ubisoft Support Website
Ubisoft Support Facebook Group
DLC Request App
RCole, if you felt personally sleighted by those remarks then I have no problem saying sorry, I have no intention of insulting anybody.
Next, I'll agree with a previous poster, that is considered by many of us, to be a "it ain't broke, don't fix it" situation. Just because some folks think it is broken, does mean it is broken.
Cool, that's why we discuss it... Like I said at the start, if everybody had said it's not broken I was quite ready to shut up about it.
I'm not fightiing with anybody here.
Last edited by KinchBlade; 05-23-2012 at 02:36 PM.
Posting Permissions
kittendaddy2
Cloudfuel