| Checkboxes |
Marino dug up some "old time" "early-days" bandAmp pages , this was one of them : http://web.archive.org/web/20050626001622/forum.bandamp.com/Audio_Review/382.html
If you check it out you'll see a checkbox next to the wimpy player giving the 'visitor' (any visitor) choices by which to rate the song. I like that idea. It's immediate, members and visitors alike can at least "VOTE" whether they leave a comment or not. They might not feel like leaving a comment or maybe have no time to or simply cant because of a language barrier. At least the song gets ratted.
It's also interactive, 'visitors' who can vote will quite soon want to become 'members' who can say something about it!
And if you look down the page it doesn't deter members from commenting either.
Was there a good reason why it was taken out?
And what about a way of categorizing ones own songs?
If you check it out you'll see a checkbox next to the wimpy player giving the 'visitor' (any visitor) choices by which to rate the song. I like that idea. It's immediate, members and visitors alike can at least "VOTE" whether they leave a comment or not. They might not feel like leaving a comment or maybe have no time to or simply cant because of a language barrier. At least the song gets ratted.
It's also interactive, 'visitors' who can vote will quite soon want to become 'members' who can say something about it!
And if you look down the page it doesn't deter members from commenting either.
Was there a good reason why it was taken out?
And what about a way of categorizing ones own songs?
| qualifying |
That's a good idea , Kings...also when I clicked on a member who left a comment
it showed ow many times that member has voted and how many reviews they made
Why cant we get that system back...so we can see how many times a member has voted and reviewed...I know that we can see how many times one has reviewed. It would be nice to see how many times one has voted.
If non members can vote, then eventually I think they will become a member.There are always a lot of non members on the site. It would definitely pick up the number of votes/ratings a song gets. it would also eliminate the problem with battles. There hasn't been a qualifying song for the last 4 battles.
I think we should have control over our work. If we want anything to be downloaded or not, we should be the ones who decide on our work. Myspace has a option on songs that are posted by artist. The artist decides if they want or don't want a song to have the download option. Why can't we have a feature like that ?
Flyer
it showed ow many times that member has voted and how many reviews they made
Why cant we get that system back...so we can see how many times a member has voted and reviewed...I know that we can see how many times one has reviewed. It would be nice to see how many times one has voted.
If non members can vote, then eventually I think they will become a member.There are always a lot of non members on the site. It would definitely pick up the number of votes/ratings a song gets. it would also eliminate the problem with battles. There hasn't been a qualifying song for the last 4 battles.
I think we should have control over our work. If we want anything to be downloaded or not, we should be the ones who decide on our work. Myspace has a option on songs that are posted by artist. The artist decides if they want or don't want a song to have the download option. Why can't we have a feature like that ?
Flyer
| re: Checkboxes |
kings wrote…
Was there a good reason why it was taken out?
I can only say that one of the reasons why (I think) it was taken out was because there was a difficulty in rating songs via words like that... it's possible to give a song an 80% vote for various reasons. The song may very well have an amazing structure, but maybe a poor recording quality and a bad vocal job. With a strict number vote system, people can give an 80% because of bad elements in the song, even if the song itself has a great layout.
With the words, the problem that we had was that it wasn't really "descriptive" enough (poor word choice, but it's all i'm thinking of)... A song can be "Very Good" or even "Excellent" in some ways, but NOT so good or not so excellent in others. It felt misleading for people to vote, because the word system felt like it was only applying to how catchy the song was. Does that make sense? I'm trying to get my understanding of it down in text, but i'm not sure that it's coming out very smoothly
Additionally, the word system only allowed for 10% increments on the votes.... 0%, 10, 20, 30... 100%. The stars were adopted because it allowed for 87% votes, or others that helped individual votes be more precise.
/explination
| checkboxes |
Yes, I think we need checkboxes to allow only members to download, or all download, or no download... Most important.... Would make the site more secure for peoples music... and bring more members I think...
And also,
Triton is doing one HELL of a job! Rock on MAn..... Thank you for all your hard work, and for doing it so fast! You rock!!
JimK
And also,
Triton is doing one HELL of a job! Rock on MAn..... Thank you for all your hard work, and for doing it so fast! You rock!!
JimK
| re: re: Checkboxes |
TonightsLastSong wrote…
kings wrote…
Was there a good reason why it was taken out?
I can only say that one of the reasons why (I think) it was taken out was because there was a difficulty in rating songs via words like that... it's possible to give a song an 80% vote for various reasons. The song may very well have an amazing structure, but maybe a poor recording quality and a bad vocal job. With a strict number vote system, people can give an 80% because of bad elements in the song, even if the song itself has a great layout.
With the words, the problem that we had was that it wasn't really "descriptive" enough (poor word choice, but it's all i'm thinking of)... A song can be "Very Good" or even "Excellent" in some ways, but NOT so good or not so excellent in others. It felt misleading for people to vote, because the word system felt like it was only applying to how catchy the song was. Does that make sense? I'm trying to get my understanding of it down in text, but i'm not sure that it's coming out very smoothly
Additionally, the word system only allowed for 10% increments on the votes.... 0%, 10, 20, 30... 100%. The stars were adopted because it allowed for 87% votes, or others that helped individual votes be more precise.
/explination
I can relate to that, but I dont think it's a strong enough reason why 'not' to have it . Does it matter that it goes in increments of 10 ? does it matter that it doesn't express your exact judgment ? (then join and comment!!). The fact that it's accessible to all and BRINGS THE VOTES IN seams a much more important fact.
OK.......So that was THE voting system before?
I picture it on the page WITH the stars, like stars (increments of 1) and commenting for members and a dropdown list (increments of 10) for everyone.
Or it it not wise to make it accessible to non members??
... On top of that, it didn't work for visitors anyway. If you were not logged in, you could select anything you wanted, but it would reset to void status anyway.
Err the stars were indeed introduced because they are much more accurate (for voting). The checkboxes we are actually looking for have nothing to do with the voting interface - if it ain't broke, don't fix ...
Hey ho I love the checkboxes (dropdown menus) being in place though
EDIT: If any visitor can vote, how will these votes be registered? Based on IP number? But what if you use a proxy server with ever changing IP's, you could repeatedly vote for your own songs. I have already found suspicious accounts on the site that were probably used to boost certain member's average rating, with "visitors" being able to vote there will be no end to the fraud! Not much of a problem now but wait till prizes are re-introduced, things are bound to get nasty then! Or would you rather see visitor-votes weigh less than member votes? And would should be the ratio? No, that would be too complicated and too sensitive to abuse, that's why visitors can't vote anyway. If they are so eager to leave their mark have them create an account and share a few words too
Err the stars were indeed introduced because they are much more accurate (for voting). The checkboxes we are actually looking for have nothing to do with the voting interface - if it ain't broke, don't fix ...
Hey ho I love the checkboxes (dropdown menus) being in place though
EDIT: If any visitor can vote, how will these votes be registered? Based on IP number? But what if you use a proxy server with ever changing IP's, you could repeatedly vote for your own songs. I have already found suspicious accounts on the site that were probably used to boost certain member's average rating, with "visitors" being able to vote there will be no end to the fraud! Not much of a problem now but wait till prizes are re-introduced, things are bound to get nasty then! Or would you rather see visitor-votes weigh less than member votes? And would should be the ratio? No, that would be too complicated and too sensitive to abuse, that's why visitors can't vote anyway. If they are so eager to leave their mark have them create an account and share a few words too
PuppetXeno wrote…
I have already found suspicious accounts on the site that were probably used to boost certain member's average rating
Even for myself... I review my original version of "Actually" and I'm actually quite surprised at the number of members who signed up and rated that song and left a comment. Several of them had only a single comment to their name, or at least less than 5 comments. I don't have a frickin clue who any of them were, but they made me happy at the time
another quick point i think is at least relevant (although not critically important) is that when we used the Word system for voting, votes were typically far lower, in my opinion. That's because if you look at the rating scale, then the equivalent to 50% was like "It's good" or whatever. The words that were chosen to represent each 10% increment were a little nicer than I think we are naturally inclined to rate a song. It was super common for us artists that haven't won a battle to enter music into the battle and come out, scathed with an average 40%-50% rating. Currently (since the stars implementation) it's my personal opinion that we all tend to rate higher.
the "neutral" point on the word scale was 50% as an "it's good, i like it" rating, whereas with the stars.... well, the "neutral" point is more like 80% as an "it sounds good to me, and i'm not a mean person, so i give you an 80%"
mixing the two systems might not produce the desired results unless the words are modernized. maybe the stars could pop up a percentage (like they already do) next to an accompanying word? for instance...
100% to 95% ish, Practically Perfect! or how about Exquisite! (i like exquisite :P )
95% to 90% ish, Superb quality, lacks some elements.... blah blah
or, it could all be shifted down to more closely reflect the old word system...
100% to 90% Practically Perfect! Exquisite!
90% to 80% Very good, needs just a little work
...
50% -40% Missing lots of things that'd add to the goodness of it, but no too bad
.. etc
Again, using both systems might not work out so hot, unless we actually merge them.
TonightsLastSong wrote…
PuppetXeno wrote…
I have already found suspicious accounts on the site that were probably used to boost certain member's average rating
Even for myself... I review my original version of "Actually" and I'm actually quite surprised at the number of members who signed up and rated that song and left a comment. Several of them had only a single comment to their name, or at least less than 5 comments. I don't have a frickin clue who any of them were, but they made me happy at the time
another quick point i think is at least relevant (although not critically important) is that when we used the Word system for voting, votes were typically far lower, in my opinion. That's because if you look at the rating scale, then the equivalent to 50% was like "It's good" or whatever. The words that were chosen to represent each 10% increment were a little nicer than I think we are naturally inclined to rate a song. It was super common for us artists that haven't won a battle to enter music into the battle and come out, scathed with an average 40%-50% rating. Currently (since the stars implementation) it's my personal opinion that we all tend to rate higher.
the "neutral" point on the word scale was 50% as an "it's good, i like it" rating, whereas with the stars.... well, the "neutral" point is more like 80% as an "it sounds good to me, and i'm not a mean person, so i give you an 80%"
mixing the two systems might not produce the desired results unless the words are modernized. maybe the stars could pop up a percentage (like they already do) next to an accompanying word? for instance...
100% to 95% ish, Practically Perfect! or how about Exquisite! (i like exquisite :P )
95% to 90% ish, Superb quality, lacks some elements.... blah blah
or, it could all be shifted down to more closely reflect the old word system...
100% to 90% Practically Perfect! Exquisite!
90% to 80% Very good, needs just a little work
...
50% -40% Missing lots of things that'd add to the goodness of it, but no too bad
.. etc
Again, using both systems might not work out so hot, unless we actually merge them.
Yes, I like that idea of merging the systems. I don't think it's too hard to implement a bit of text showing up next to the percentage that goes with the stars, and basically what that text should represent can already be found in the guides of how to rate/review that can be accessed at the bottom of every song page.
Also I do think showing the number of votes a member has placed on their profile page is a good idea (just had to say that).
PuppetXeno wrote…
EDIT: If any visitor can vote, how will these votes be registered? Based on IP number? But what if you use a proxy server with ever changing IP's, you could repeatedly vote for your own songs. I have already found suspicious accounts on the site that were probably used to boost certain member's average rating, with "visitors" being able to vote there will be no end to the fraud! Not much of a problem now but wait till prizes are re-introduced, things are bound to get nasty then! Or would you rather see visitor-votes weigh less than member votes? And would should be the ratio? No, that would be too complicated and too sensitive to abuse, that's why visitors can't vote anyway. If they are so eager to leave their mark have them create an account and share a few words too :)
Thought this through after and came to a similar conclusion, even with the site being fairly small it would only lead to voting fraud!!
I still think 'another' way of voting like a dropdown list next to the player would be a good idea, it fills up the empty space and it's clearer, you might know where the stars are PX, but many do miss them even at the top of the page!
kings wrote…
I still think 'another' way of voting like a dropdown list next to the player would be a good idea, it fills up the empty space and it's clearer, you might know where the stars are PX, but many do miss them even at the top of the page!
Yes, I do agree that the empty space next to the player should be filled up with a bigger set of stars with a "Click on the stars to rate this song!" above it. Then as the mouse goes over the stars, beneath them would show up the exact percentage aswell as a short text ("horrible", "decent", "excellent" etc...) appearing with each 10% increment. I also remember Carsten (TK) once mentioning a more elaborate voting system where one would leave a rating per aspect of the song (performance, production, composition, originality..)
Having the different aspects of a work rated would certainly be interesting to the artist, maybe on an "advanced stats" page of a song. Aspect-specific rating should be made optional though, and the end result should be counted as a single rating like a normal rating according to the 5-star system.
I don't want to get too far ahead ofcourse, and one thing at a time
But it's worth thinking about!hey, i endorse it, PX. i think that'd be exactly the kind of more precise rating that i'm sure many of these artists are looking for.
exactly what I thought
Sorry, you do not have access to post...
Wanna post? Join Today!