10th Trials - Suggestions and Feedback

[mrpaper]

I've got 2 ideas to the voting thingy.

First of it would be good if you could vote for more competitors in elements with more than 2 players. So instead of being forced to choose between 2 really good ones you can choose both. Would work if we can rank them I would actually like that a lot but it may seems disapointing for the one getting ranked last all the time.

I also think that the pools shouldn't be added at the start of phase 3. Because as it is now most people vote even before questions and answered are made.
So maybe having voting period being 9 days. Asking and answering questions should last through the whole phase ( 9 days ) and pools should be added 3-4 days prior to phase 3 ending. It is why people can change the vote during all the days.  Also, the vote is base on the answer, but also on the performance of the phase 1-2 and of all we know from the person from before so the Q and A doesn't affect that many votes in my opinion and those who really cares about the answer will wait or change the vote if needed be.  Lastly, trials are already  more then long enough so I wouldn't recommend anything that could make them longer.

[rob77dp]

I've got 2 ideas to the voting thingy.

First of it would be good if you could vote for more competitors in elements with more than 2 players. So instead of being forced to choose between 2 really good ones you can choose both. Would work if we can rank them I would actually like that a lot but it may seems disapointing for the one getting ranked last all the time.

I also think that the pools shouldn't be added at the start of phase 3. Because as it is now most people vote even before questions and answered are made.
So maybe having voting period being 9 days. Asking and answering questions should last through the whole phase ( 9 days ) and pools should be added 3-4 days prior to phase 3 ending. It is why people can change the vote during all the days.  Also, the vote is base on the answer, but also on the performance of the phase 1-2 and of all we know from the person from before so the Q and A doesn't affect that many votes in my opinion and those who really cares about the answer will wait or change the vote if needed be.  Lastly, trials are already  more then long enough so I wouldn't recommend anything that could make them longer.

To your last point, paper, I do not believe votes can be changed once submitted. I know I voted a few quickly/early and as I reviewed later on they were locked in and not editable.

[worldwideweb3]

I've got 2 ideas to the voting thingy.

First of it would be good if you could vote for more competitors in elements with more than 2 players. So instead of being forced to choose between 2 really good ones you can choose both. Would work if we can rank them I would actually like that a lot but it may seems disapointing for the one getting ranked last all the time.

I also think that the pools shouldn't be added at the start of phase 3. Because as it is now most people vote even before questions and answered are made.
So maybe having voting period being 9 days. Asking and answering questions should last through the whole phase ( 9 days ) and pools should be added 3-4 days prior to phase 3 ending. It is why people can change the vote during all the days.  Also, the vote is base on the answer, but also on the performance of the phase 1-2 and of all we know from the person from before so the Q and A doesn't affect that many votes in my opinion and those who really cares about the answer will wait or change the vote if needed be.  Lastly, trials are already  more then long enough so I wouldn't recommend anything that could make them longer.

To your last point, paper, I do not believe votes can be changed once submitted. I know I voted a few quickly/early and as I reviewed later on they were locked in and not editable.

I'm pretty sure i changed my vote for one of the elements after submitting....

[JonathanCrazyJ]

Votes were changeable for me...

[rob77dp]

Votes were changeable for me...

I'm pretty sure i changed my vote for one of the elements after submitting....

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa? Is there some special 'change vote' hidden button I do not know to click?

[worldwideweb3]

Votes were changeable for me...

I'm pretty sure i changed my vote for one of the elements after submitting....

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa? Is there some special 'change vote' hidden button I do not know to click?

You click remove vote, then just vote again.

[Aves]

First of it would be good if you could vote for more competitors in elements with more than 2 players. So instead of being forced to choose between 2 really good ones you can choose both.

This. As Joey put it, if I had a second vote, I would've used it.

[willng3]

Alright, I had more suggestions/feedback to make here but I want to make this suggestion now since it seems particularly relevant and fresh in my mind.
My feedback here is that I simply do not agree with the purpose of the "None worthy" option featured during Phase 3 in its current state.

Currently the only difference that this makes with respect to the Final Battle by selecting this option instead of not voting at all is that the inclusion of "None worthy" causes a near-equal reduction in upgrades for all participants, which from my perspective only makes a major difference if one of the Final Battle candidates has like less than 6 upgrades total.

The second effect that this has is much more personal since participants are able to actually see how many people think that they are so unsuitable for Mastership that selecting a final option of "None of the above" would still be better than seeing them represent the Element in question. This isn't necessarily a bad thing but the message conveyed by doing this is more malicious when an explanation is not provided as to why some voters elected to select that other option over the actual candidates because those reasons become left to interpretation, which from the perspective of said candidates is hard not to be seen as "all of you suck and I don't want to see you anywhere near this Element again". Had, for example, ian not publicly asked the "None worthy" voters why they had voted as such, would these voters have gone out of their way to communicate their reasons to him on their own? This is important to consider because without constructive criticism/feedback, whoever does become Master is left without a clear direction on how they can improve themselves in the future and in some scenarios having a Master that does not possess ambition or enthusiasm due to such events can actually be a worse outcome than having no Master represent said Element at all.

So, that being said, my current suggestions for this are as follows:
1) Either remove the "None worthy" option from polls in the future completely. Or
2) Give this option more meaning. If this is a community vote and a majority of the community honestly feels that having no master would be better than having one of the candidates represent the Element in question, then wouldn't it make sense for a case to be included where: "If 'None worthy' takes the majority vote, then a Final Battle does not take place as neither candidate has been deemed worthy"? Same could be said of Elements with one candidate participating. In addition, indicating who voted for this option and why would be a method of weeding out troll voters and people who select the option purely because they feel safe hiding behind their shield of anonymity.

[Blacksmith]

Alright, I had more suggestions/feedback to make here but I want to make this suggestion now since it seems particularly relevant and fresh in my mind.
My feedback here is that I simply do not agree with the purpose of the "None worthy" option featured during Phase 3 in its current state.

Currently the only difference that this makes with respect to the Final Battle by selecting this option instead of not voting at all is that the inclusion of "None worthy" causes a near-equal reduction in upgrades for all participants, which from my perspective only makes a major difference if one of the Final Battle candidates has like less than 6 upgrades total.

The second effect that this has is much more personal since participants are able to actually see how many people think that they are so unsuitable for Mastership that selecting a final option of "None of the above" would still be better than seeing them represent the Element in question. This isn't necessarily a bad thing but the message conveyed by doing this is more malicious when an explanation is not provided as to why some voters elected to select that other option over the actual candidates because those reasons become left to interpretation, which from the perspective of said candidates is hard not to be seen as "all of you suck and I don't want to see you anywhere near this Element again". Had, for example, ian not publicly asked the "None worthy" voters why they had voted as such, would these voters have gone out of their way to communicate their reasons to him on their own? This is important to consider because without constructive criticism/feedback, whoever does become Master is left without a clear direction on how they can improve themselves in the future and in some scenarios having a Master that does not possess ambition or enthusiasm due to such events can actually be a worse outcome than having no Master represent said Element at all.

So, that being said, my current suggestions for this are as follows:
1) Either remove the "None worthy" option from polls in the future completely. Or
2) Give this option more meaning. If this is a community vote and a majority of the community honestly feels that having no master would be better than having one of the candidates represent the Element in question, then wouldn't it make sense for a case to be included where: "If 'None worthy' takes the majority vote, then a Final Battle does not take place as neither candidate has been deemed worthy"? Same could be said of Elements with one candidate participating. In addition, indicating who voted for this option and why would be a method of weeding out troll voters and people who select the option purely because they feel safe hiding behind their shield of anonymity.

I agree with parts of the above but like to add some perspective.

Here is the description of how you should vote ( it's written in every vote thread ) Vote based on who you think would make the best Master of that element. Do not vote based on who is the best player or who you know personally. Try to pick someone who you think would help the community the most as THE representative for their element.  If you do not have any preference for who should be Master, or cannot decide between the candidates, please select the "None Worthy" option. 
So by reading the official statement the " none worthy " option is not the official choice if you think the candidates aren't worthy of mastership. However on an unofficial note that is how some people interpenetrate it, and vote accordingly to the interpenetration, which causes the problems willing mentioned. The other people who's voting for the "none worthy" option votes by whats stated officially.

I do think that the "none worthy" option should be renamed, in order to prevent people from miss interpenetrate the option.

[Submachine]

Based on what Blacksmith said, maybe it should be renamed to "No preference". That seems to fit the given description more.

I'm going off-topic here, but how will the Round 3 votes affect the final battles? Didn't have the time to read enough to find it, so I'm asking here.

[worldwideweb3]

Based on what Blacksmith said, maybe it should be renamed to "No preference". That seems to fit the given description more.

I'm going off-topic here, but how will the Round 3 votes affect the final battles? Didn't have the time to read enough to find it, so I'm asking here.

It doesnt affect who goes through to final battle, but it affects their upgrades. 60% votes give 6 upgrades, etc.

[Zawadx]

Based on what Blacksmith said, maybe it should be renamed to "No preference". That seems to fit the given description more.

I'm going off-topic here, but how will the Round 3 votes affect the final battles? Didn't have the time to read enough to find it, so I'm asking here.

It doesnt affect who goes through to final battle, but it affects their upgrades. 60% votes give 6 upgrades, etc.

er, it affects who goes on to final battles.

The number of points you score is based on the percentage of votes you get. If there is a situation where rounding up would mean more than 10 points given, the player with the highest "extra" percentage of votes gets the advantage (54%/46% -> 5 points and 5 points). In case of a tie, the player with more gets the advantage (54%/44% -> 6 points and 4 points)