Author Thread
10/09/2009 02:56:14 PMPost actions · #1
Due to recent feedback and to avoid future issues like this one , voting requirement calculations have been relaxed. Three tweaks were made:
- The submission count will be calculated as (Entry Count - Disqualified Entry Count)
- If the voter submitted an entry, 1 will be subtracted from the total to account for any anomalies
- Troll voting parameters were tweaked to hopefully lessen the amount of false positives
For the example referenced at the top, instead of the calculation being 80/401 (19%), in the future, it will result in 80/398 (20%).
These tweaks will not be retroactive.
10/09/2009 03:42:23 PMPost actions · #2
10/09/2009 03:45:44 PMPost actions · #3
Thanks for being attentive, and dealing with things like this, Langdon.
10/09/2009 03:56:26 PMPost actions · #4
Many thanks for this Langdon - very helpful and most responsive.
Thanks again
Paul
10/09/2009 04:00:16 PMPost actions · #5
10/09/2009 04:07:36 PMPost actions · #6
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
This changes everything.
10/09/2009 04:22:54 PMPost actions · #7
How about an increase in size allowances now? I'll give you $25.Message edited by author 2009-10-09 16:23:18.
10/09/2009 04:37:21 PMPost actions · #8
Not sure what this means, but ok. :)
10/09/2009 04:45:07 PMPost actions · #9
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Not sure what this means, but ok. :)
agreed. someone translate to english please?
10/09/2009 04:48:00 PMPost actions · #10
Look at the thread that langdon refers to in the opening post.
10/09/2009 07:37:14 PMPost actions · #11
What about the Javascript application that provides a mild shock to anyone leaving a 3 or less without a comment? I thought that was in work.
10/09/2009 07:42:50 PMPost actions · #12
Ya know what? That's nice, Langdon . To borrow a phrase from our friends
down under: "good on you."
10/09/2009 09:01:13 PMPost actions · #13
...the committee has been feeling extraordinarily generous this year.Message edited by author 2009-10-09 21:01:21.
10/09/2009 09:14:27 PMPost actions · #14
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
...the committee has been feeling extraordinarily generous this year.
heh
10/09/2009 09:22:58 PMPost actions · #15
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
...the committee has been feeling extraordinarily generous this year.
Bravo!
10/09/2009 09:36:50 PMPost actions · #16
That is a tremendous honor Art, thanks!
10/09/2009 10:51:15 PMPost actions · #17
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
...the committee has been feeling extraordinarily generous this year.
But Langdon actually did something productive. Far more than the previous two recipients have done. :)
10/09/2009 11:08:55 PMPost actions · #18
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
...the committee has been feeling extraordinarily generous this year.
But Langdon actually did something productive. Far more than the previous two recipients have done. :)
And the last Republican Nobel Peace Prize winner? Can't really think of one. How Christian, how ironic.... :)
10/09/2009 11:13:23 PMPost actions · #19
10/09/2009 11:36:38 PMPost actions · #20
Originally posted by delin:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
...the committee has been feeling extraordinarily generous this year.
But Langdon actually did something productive. Far more than the previous two recipients have done. :)
And the last Republican Nobel Peace Prize winner? Can't really think of one. How Christian, how ironic.... :)
Teddy Roosevelt, 1906. Known for being a progressive.
~Terry
10/10/2009 12:13:00 AMPost actions · #21
Originally posted by desertoddity:
what's a false positive?
When the vote scrubber throws out someone's honest votes because it sees their voting pattern as one normally done by trolls tactical voters.
10/10/2009 01:37:36 AMPost actions · #22
[never mind] Message edited by author 2009-10-10 03:31:40.