RedDawn's Feed

RedDawn
09-14-2021 at 03:50 AM
30 Comments
Rate this Entry

A kind of blind voting?

I just lost cred for voting Yes on this submission:
https://www.twingalaxies.com/showthread.php/236478

Barthax commented that a submitters time was wrong.
The thing is ,the time wasnt wrong, the submitter had it right. Barthax must have misread it.

Unless there's something Im missing adjudicators, I assume, simply read Barthax's comment and voted No rather then watching the video themselves.

To my knowledge there is no way to challenge a rejection, so I guess those cred points I lost are just gone now.

Comments
  1. MyOwnWorstEnemy's Avatar

    Unfortunately under the current adjudication and challenge system, I think you are $hit out of luck. As you stated, I don't know of a way to challenge an incorrect 'No' adjudication outcome. Perhaps the @admin staff can provide some guidance or intervene to cancel out this submission outcome and reinstate the credibility lost by those voting 'Yes'.

    Good Luck

    LikesRedDawn, rotunda liked this post
  2. swaggers's Avatar

    The main issue is since it's a rejection, which technically can be for any number of reasons, it would open a whole can of worms if you could challenge. Rejected for not showing console; I don't think I need to. Challenge. Rejected for wrong format; I think I should be able to play on anything I want. Challenge.

  3. bensweeneyonbass's Avatar

    I absolutely voted No on this one. I did look at the video and I did think it was a six and not a five. Was I biased by Pete's comment? I'm sure of it. Had I been doing a diligent job I would've not just looked at the time but added up the lap times to corroborate the race time.


    I am part of the problem!

  4. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar

    The real problem is that this 'one day adjudication' nonsense leaves no time for extensive discussion. Making the minimum adjudication interval seven days would keep the submissions queue moving just as smoothly, but no one in admin appears to have the brains to realise that simple fact.

    Thanksbensweeneyonbass, Fly, rotunda thanked this post
    LikesBlackflag82, Fly, Rev John, Barthax, rotunda liked this post
  5. MyOwnWorstEnemy's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by swaggers

    The main issue is since it's a rejection, which technically can be for any number of reasons, it would open a whole can of worms if you could challenge. Rejected for not showing console; I don't think I need to. Challenge. Rejected for wrong format; I think I should be able to play on anything I want. Challenge.

    For full transparency, I did not vote on this submission. I have no dog in this fight as far as outcome.

    While I get what you are saying, I do think we can keep a lid on the proverbial "can of worms" concern. I agree that there could be a possibility that the submission was rejected for other reason besides the misinformation posted by an adjudicator (no blame as we are all human). However that was the only challenge that was communicated in the submission thread. There was also a counter challenge to that challenge too. This IMO is enough information to declare an equivalent of a mistrial. The adjudicators may have relied on this misinformation to render a decision. Therefore the appropriate action here is to render the outcome void (mistrial) as well as its consequential actions to members credibility and submission point. Restart the adjudication process (new trial) without the erroneous information that could have 'tainted' the adjudicators decision. If there are other reasons that this submission was rejected, the adjudicators that vote 'No' have the opportunity to make their argument.

    No can of worms... just a redo...




    LikesBlackflag82, Luigi Ruffolo liked this post
    Updated 09-14-2021 at 07:09 AM by MyOwnWorstEnemy
  6. Blackflag82's Avatar

    This is an interesting example of a widened hole in the TGSAP system since the algorithm was adjusted for faster processing times. I imagine this could have happened previously, but would have been much less likely. I also imagine TG's response will largely be to shrug their shoulders and say it's just a flaw that will sometimes pop up (though i'd live to be proven wrong)

    Essentially the current system is designed to deal with incorrectly approved submissions, but there is no recourse to deal with incorrectly rejected submissions. It could be said that is no big deal because the submitter can just resubmit and it'll go through properly the next time (if it was actually a mistake in adjudication and there wasn't something else that was the reason for rejection). The problem, is that the system then rewards some people's mistakes while penalizing others due diligence.

    As a one-off this isn't necessarily that problematic, however, it could be used for credibility and adjudication manipulation if practiced by a relatively small handful of voters (coupled with the normal amount of blind voting). Might be something TG wants to consider making a process for, as generally it would require a pretty infrequent inspection from TG staff when it came up, and an increase in frequency if a process is in place would actually be the alert that manipulation was occurring

    ThanksMyOwnWorstEnemy, rotunda thanked this post
  7. Almighty Dreadlock's Avatar

    One thing I think ought to be noted:-

    Submissions are not disputable.

    Records are disputable. Unless a submission results in a record, forget about reversing the adjudicative decision. We're discussing a submission which deserved to result in a record, but didn't. Only way I see to fix that injustice is to reopen the submission, leaving all votes as they were.

    LikesBlackflag82, RedDawn, Barthax, Ragequit liked this post
  8. RedDawn's Avatar

    One possible solution to prevent this from happening:

    Right now the TGSAP process is confirmed when a certain total number of votes have been cast. Rather than TOTAL votes, it should be a certain threshold of EITHER 'yes' OR 'no' votes.

    Lets say right now a total of 50 votes is what either confirms or rejects a submission, no matter if its 10 'No' Votes and 40 'Yes' votes, or any ratio in between, the total number is what pushes it into being accepted or rejected.

    I feel like it should be a total of 40 'yes' votes OR 40 'no' votes (or whatever arbitrary number you wish to use), for example if you have 30 'No' votes then 10 'Yes' votes shouldn't push it over the threshold until the number of Yes votes reaches 40.

    This should prevent a lone dissenting voice voting against the majority from pushing the submission into being accepted/rejected.

  9. Barthax's Avatar

    I've had (feels like, can't confirm exactly) more than 24 hours away from the forum - I would have happily confirmed the mistake in the thread had it still been open. Eyesight slowly fading with age which is why you'll see in screenshots that I use a magnifier app regularly - even have new glasses. I've said it many times before: I make mistakes. :P I don't post them to throw people, I just make mistakes.

    My apologies to those who got caught up in the reject with correct "Yes" votes.

    Likesnads liked this post
    Updated 09-15-2021 at 02:01 AM by Barthax
  10. rotunda's Avatar

    I'm glad someone else picked up on this and I'm sorry to those who lost CR over this.

    The time was 100% correct, proof here: https://www.twingalaxies.com/rotunda/wall/9783/why-has-this-been-rejected

    And i agree with the OP. There is clearly a lot of blind voting going on. The video is recorded at 720p, its clear as day, yes the text is a bit close for the 5 but just look above during the entire race... "765" on the total time record...

    It's honestly blind voting. There is no other explanation. I'm not pointing fingers at those who voted. I'm just saying, it's rather obvious.

  11. rotunda's Avatar

    @admin staff I am urging you, please to return all lost CR to those effected by this. I don't care about mine personally, I'm more annoyed that other people, who care about their CR here lost theirs over this.

    I don't want the submission accepted, i will resubmit it with a clear image to help the next time around. But please can you give those who took the time to view the submission and DID vote correctly their CR back. This is all i ask.

    Thank you.

    ThanksMyOwnWorstEnemy thanked this post
    LikesMyOwnWorstEnemy liked this post
  12. Bishop Black's Avatar

    I think that a way for members to contest a rejected submission wouldn't be a bad idea. (Such as a sub-forum where they can list the rejected submission and state a case for why the rejection was in error)

    ThanksRagequit thanked this post
    LikesLuigi Ruffolo, rotunda liked this post
  13. Ragequit's Avatar

    The score isn't hard to see at all! All who voted yes should get their cred back and jason should get his submission points back. How you gonna tell me people are being punished for making the right decision and nothing can be done about it? Get your act together TGSAP

    Thanksrotunda thanked this post
  14. rotunda's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Ragequit

    The score isn't hard to see at all! All who voted yes should get their cred back and jason should get his submission points back. How you gonna tell me people are being punished for making the right decision and nothing can be done about it? Get your act together TGSAP

    ^^ This

    @admin staff @Jace Hall any word on this please?

  15. TWIN GALAXIES's Avatar

    A submission that has been rejected by TGSAP can not be disputed. The submission can only be re-submitted to the TGSAP system to attempt to pass again.

  16. MyOwnWorstEnemy's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by TWIN GALAXIES

    A submission that has been rejected by TGSAP can not be disputed. The submission can only be re-submitted to the TGSAP system to attempt to pass again.

    In this circumstance, the popular and right action is to 'remove' the adjudication decision and reset credibility and submission points back to adjudicators as if this was never voted or submitted. The original submitter can choose to resubmit and have their performance accepted if they want. It doesn't seem fair that those with better eyesight and/or due diligence take a credibility hit, weakening their voting power on future adjudication.

    For instances like this, what action would you recommend that an adjudicator take to avoid being on the wrong, and I mean wrong side of a decision. Without any recourse to right the wrong, my advice is run-away and avoid voting on anything that has false negative challenges. An adjudicator trying to right a wrong while the submission is still active in the adjudication process is a credibility 'bear trap' that is about to be sprung.

    VOTER BEWARE! RUN AWAY!

    ThanksRagequit thanked this post
    LikesBarthax, Blackflag82, rotunda liked this post
  17. Blackflag82's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by TWIN GALAXIES

    A submission that has been rejected by TGSAP can not be disputed. The submission can only be re-submitted to the TGSAP system to attempt to pass again.

    Exactly the kind of tone deaf response one has come to expect from TG these days...

    Members of the community: Hey TG, here is an example of the quicker adjudication time creating a scenario in which members are penalized for correct votes, but there is no recourse to undo the wrongfully imposed penalty. It doesn't happen often, so seems like it could be dealt with directly when it does, and the correction made, right?

    TG: *gives answer akin to a script in a foreign call center*


    ThanksRagequit thanked this post
    LikesMyOwnWorstEnemy, rotunda, RedDawn liked this post
  18. bensweeneyonbass's Avatar

    Just lengthen the time it takes for adjudications to pass. Minimum 7 days has been thrown around and I like that. I hope we can all agree that 7 days is still very fast compared to prior TGSAP configurations.

    ThanksRagequit thanked this post
    Likesrotunda, lexmark liked this post
  19. MyOwnWorstEnemy's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackflag82


    Exactly the kind of tone deaf response one has come to expect from TG these days...

    Members of the community: Hey TG, here is an example of the quicker adjudication time creating a scenario in which members are penalized for correct votes, but there is no recourse to undo the wrongfully imposed penalty. It doesn't happen often, so seems like it could be dealt with directly when it does, and the correction made, right?

    TG: *gives answer akin to a script in a foreign call center*


    When do we get the customer service survey?

    1) "Were we able to answer your questions and/or resolve your concerns"?

    NO

    2) "Using a scale 1 to 10, how would you rate your experience today? 1 for poor and 10 for exceptional".

    2 - It would have been lower but at least you picked up the phone (responded) after a few dozen rings!

    Likesrotunda liked this post
  20. rotunda's Avatar

    The fact adjudicators are the reason this site keeps flowing and running the way it does and this is the sort of responce they get when a fault in the system is found is just stupid sorry.

    For instances like this, what action would you recommend that an adjudicator take to avoid being on the wrong, and I mean wrong side of a decision. Without any recourse to right the wrong, my advice is run-away and avoid voting on anything that has false negative challenges. An adjudicator trying to right a wrong while the submission is still active in the adjudication process is a credibility 'bear trap' that is about to be sprung.

    VOTER BEWARE! RUN AWAY!

    Exactly this... we have so many variables now its a minefield, I don't even want to participate in voting here anymore. I genuinely feel sorry for those who voted on my submission correctly but got a CR hit anyway... it's just ridiculous. It's like doing an hours worth of work and being told you aren't getting paid for that, we could resolve it... but we won't. You should give people an incentive to vote not put them off like this. If you did incentive voting you wouldn't need all this sped up adjudication as enough people would participate to make it work (like it used to).

    Forget me voting here anymore. It's not worth it anymore and I'm somewhat doing it as a stand to the decision made here. Take my CR and use it to give people theirs back if you want, i don't care. It's just not fair on people here to loose CR when all they ever did was vote correctly.

    On a side note, what happened to JJT Defender? He was one of the big hitters here and such a good adjudicator. Did he get sick of this place too?

    Pretty disappointed with this decision and will be not voting anymore.

    LikesMyOwnWorstEnemy liked this post
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Join us