Improving the Weekly Rumble - come vote!

Jul!a Jul!a
Hey guys, I've recently seen some of you talking on the Rumble threads about possible changes we could make.

With the way the Rumble semi-finals and finals are set up, the option of tallying up all the votes for all of the reviews a single contributor has in the Rumble doesn't work all that well. And having multiple reviews in a Rumble can really hurt your chances of winning it. So I have some voting options here for you, and I would love for you to weigh in with your opinion as well.
Answers (private voting - your screen name will NOT appear in the results):
I like the Rumble as it is now; where one person can be nominated with multiple reviews and each is voted on separately
4
I want to have all of a reviewer's votes tallied across all of their reviews
I think that we should limit nominations to one per reviewer: the first review for any reviewer to be nominated is the one that makes it to the next Rumble.
23
I think that we should limit nominations to one per reviewer: a reviewer may post on the Rumble thread on the last day to choose which of their reviews moves on. If they don't, it defaults to the first one.
52
I have another idea that I think you should listen to, and will tell you in the comments.
1
I'm really only voting to get the point and feel like I'm part of the Cool Kids Club.
3
Total votes: 83 (69 voters)
Poll is closed
02/03/2012
  • Get 3 amazing toys for $60 only
  • Black Friday Cyber Monday 70% Clearance
  • Black Friday Cyber Monday 50% Clearance
  • Black Friday Cyber Monday 40% Clearance
  • Black Friday Cyber Monday 25% Clearance
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
All promotions
~LaUr3n~ ~LaUr3n~
I've never felt the rumble was fair. I like these options better.
02/03/2012
lilly555 lilly555
If the reviewer has multiple reviews its only fair that they get to choose the one and only that makes it to the rumble. For those that write several reviews per week there Friday review may not be as good as a reveiw they post on Wednesday of that same nominating period. This is also a way of making sure the very best review make it to the end.
02/03/2012
Ms. N Ms. N
I am tending towards the first review nominated by a reviewer gets to go to the rumble. This is why:

One reviewer has three reviews nominated in a week. Another reviewer writes three reviews that are just as worthy, but only one gets nominated. The second reviewer did not get to choose which review went up for the rumble. Why should the first one get to choose?
02/03/2012
Teacookie Teacookie
lol thank you for the clickie option. probably tally across all their reviews we are voting on the writer that way not the review. If it's suppose to be a review disscusion then limit it to one entry per person.
02/03/2012
unfulfilled unfulfilled
I like that there may be changes good idea.
02/04/2012
Cookie Monster Mike Cookie Monster Mike
We all seem to have one goal in mind, making the rumble more fair. While I'm sure this discussion will help to improve it slightly, there will always be something unfair about it.

First, I personally feel 1 review per contributor should be in the vote list and no more per rumble. This "weekly" rumble is for 1 contributor to win, some weeks there are already enough reviews to vote on, let alone have 3 from one person. Tallying up all votes from 3 reviews for one contributor to me overall seems unfair. As someone had mentioned in a different discussion, each of those reviews is entirely different, for different products etc. This is supposed to be a competition where we are nominating someone for a review we think is rumble worthy! So why should that contributor get votes for 3 different reviews tallied up? It gives an unfair advantage over everyone else in the rumble.

Then again, solving this issue is hard, do we limit it to one review nomination per contributor? Or keep it the same and the host of the rumble picks the first review for that contributor that was nom'd? Then again, that contributor with the 3 nom'd reviews may feel cheated out because their review that is picked may not be the one they personally would like in the review. I think overall from many different angles on what is fair and unfair. In the end, I think still 1 review per nom will be the safest route, the contributor that is nom'd will just have to hope that their review picked is one they would like in the rumble.

I also want to point out that I have noticed something on the #119 rumble. I noticed that, with my review that was voted as the winner, probably more than 50% of the votes on the rumble page were not on my review. I feel maybe a lot of people didn't actually read the review, I know at least they didn't vote or comment on it. My point is, I feel that maybe which such a long list of reviews in the #119 rumble that some people randomly vote. Or perhaps they don't feel like reading all those reviews and just vote for whoever is in the lead. So in turn, 1 review per contributor can help to keep each weeks rumble in a more manageable competition. However it means some weeks the list will be really short if few nom's come in. There's nothing that can really be done about this but It was something I had noticed on last weeks rumble, and previous ones as well. I'm sure this happens with a specific group of people, but not so much the advanced reviewers/active contributors who have been around a lot longer.

Okay I think I am done with my short story. Hope it helps!
02/04/2012
indiglo indiglo
I agree that only 1 review should be nommed per author. Having multiple reviews by the same author isn't a great idea. I think allowing the author to choose which one enters the rumble would be fair.

I also think that as the Rumble has gained a bit of popularity, it may be time to reduce the number of nominations that each person can make. In recent weeks I have noticed some reviews get nommed that were not entirely thorough, so perhaps limiting the number of noms each person can make would cause all of us to be a bit more discerning when making our nominations.
02/04/2012
sktb0007 sktb0007
I like the idea of one per reviewer.
02/04/2012
Miss Voluptuous Miss Voluptuous
I agree with there only being one review per reviewer per week. That seems reasonable
02/05/2012
Lucky21 Lucky21
I too like the idea of one per reviewer. Just on a side note, and I have no idea on how to fix it, sometimes I have thought that once a review gets a few more votes than the rest, it seems to then take off like wild fire and that people may not actually be going through and reading the reviews, but just checking a box because it's popular. Just a thought...
02/06/2012
Cookie Monster Mike Cookie Monster Mike
Quote:
Originally posted by Lucky21
I too like the idea of one per reviewer. Just on a side note, and I have no idea on how to fix it, sometimes I have thought that once a review gets a few more votes than the rest, it seems to then take off like wild fire and that people may not ... More
I totally agree with you. I have noticed this on many rumbles before. Once a review starts to take the lead more than others, I feel people often might think "well they are that far ahead I might as well just vote for them"

While I can't say for a fact this is true, just me speculating!
02/06/2012
Antipova Antipova
I think I would also kind of like to see a new way to do the rumble where the contributors' names are not posted, just the title of the review. Of course people will know who wrote which review once they click through and read the reviews, but it will prevent popularity contests and favoritism among the voters who don't actually read each review before voting.

I don't know if this was the kind of input you were hoping for, but it's something I've thought would be an idea worth considering for a long time now.
02/07/2012
blacklodge blacklodge
Quote:
Originally posted by Antipova
I think I would also kind of like to see a new way to do the rumble where the contributors' names are not posted, just the title of the review. Of course people will know who wrote which review once they click through and read the reviews, but it ... More
Seconded!
02/07/2012
Ansley Ansley
Quote:
Originally posted by Antipova
I think I would also kind of like to see a new way to do the rumble where the contributors' names are not posted, just the title of the review. Of course people will know who wrote which review once they click through and read the reviews, but it ... More
Thirded!
02/07/2012
Jul!a Jul!a
Quote:
Originally posted by Antipova
I think I would also kind of like to see a new way to do the rumble where the contributors' names are not posted, just the title of the review. Of course people will know who wrote which review once they click through and read the reviews, but it ... More
Any input is welcome, seriously. I think we'll run the poll for another week or two and then maybe one last refining poll and we'll make the changes!
02/07/2012
Shellz31 Shellz31
It doesn't bother me too much what changes there are. I enjoy hosting the rumble, but I really don't care to be nommed cause it seems it's always the same people who win. From where I'm sitting, it's a popularity competition.
02/07/2012
PassionateLover2 PassionateLover2
The only contribution I would like to offer, is that for newcomers, it may be very difficult to get the recognition, too be nominated. Moreover, there are so may contributor who pump out copious amounts of reviews that it seems to overwhelm those of us who only write one or two from time to time.

I have come to feel that as 'Shellz31' said above, it does seems to be a popularity competition. I don't know how that can be mitigated, unless you propose that any winner of a Rumble is not allowed to be nominated again for 30 days.
02/07/2012
Ms. N Ms. N
Quote:
Originally posted by PassionateLover2
The only contribution I would like to offer, is that for newcomers, it may be very difficult to get the recognition, too be nominated. Moreover, there are so may contributor who pump out copious amounts of reviews that it seems to overwhelm those of ... More
This sounds like a good idea. I am sure we have enough people consistently writing quality reviews to have some out of the running for a few weeks.
02/07/2012
Beck Beck
Quote:
Originally posted by PassionateLover2
The only contribution I would like to offer, is that for newcomers, it may be very difficult to get the recognition, too be nominated. Moreover, there are so may contributor who pump out copious amounts of reviews that it seems to overwhelm those of ... More
I think this is a great idea too! I have to agree with Shellz31 it does seem to be the same few people who win.
02/07/2012
aliceinthehole aliceinthehole
Quote:
Originally posted by Jul!a
Hey guys, I've recently seen some of you talking on the Rumble threads about possible changes we could make.

With the way the Rumble semi-finals and finals are set up, the option of tallying up all the votes for all of the reviews a ... More
allowing reviewers to choose which gets to go in to the rumble seems too complicated. the first one to get in should get it. that's simple enough.
02/07/2012
Beck Beck
Quote:
Originally posted by aliceinthehole
allowing reviewers to choose which gets to go in to the rumble seems too complicated. the first one to get in should get it. that's simple enough.
I agree! It would require having to message that reviewer and hope they get back to you in time. It should just be the first one nominated.
02/07/2012
Beck Beck
Quote:
Originally posted by Antipova
I think I would also kind of like to see a new way to do the rumble where the contributors' names are not posted, just the title of the review. Of course people will know who wrote which review once they click through and read the reviews, but it ... More
I think this is a great idea too!
02/07/2012
indiglo indiglo
Quote:
Originally posted by PassionateLover2
The only contribution I would like to offer, is that for newcomers, it may be very difficult to get the recognition, too be nominated. Moreover, there are so may contributor who pump out copious amounts of reviews that it seems to overwhelm those of ... More
I agree 100%, and I like the idea of a winner not being eligible again for 30 days!
02/08/2012
Eva Schwaltz Eva Schwaltz
Lots of great ideas here. First of all, I know I'm the odd one out but only allowing one review per person doesn't exactly seem fair to me. Some people write a lot of reviews in a week, and if they did two great reviews, then they shouldn't have to choose which goes up.

I also like the idea of taking off people's names to reduce the popularity thing, and just leaving the titles. Not being eligible for a month is a good idea also so more people have a better shot.
02/08/2012
teachmetouchme teachmetouchme
Quote:
Originally posted by Eva Schwaltz
Lots of great ideas here. First of all, I know I'm the odd one out but only allowing one review per person doesn't exactly seem fair to me. Some people write a lot of reviews in a week, and if they did two great reviews, then they ... More
The names would have to be left off all the written reviews, which is a great idea. Then all voting would be impartial. Great suggestion.
02/11/2012
Ms. N Ms. N
Quote:
Originally posted by teachmetouchme
The names would have to be left off all the written reviews, which is a great idea. Then all voting would be impartial. Great suggestion.
Taking the names off the written reviews could complicate matters. I don't think it would be practical.
02/11/2012
Kindred Kindred
I'm not sure I agree that the same contributors keep winning the Rumbles. Looking back at the last 20 weeks, here are the winners:

PassionateLover2
Cookie Monster Mike
sktb0007
Cookie Monster Mike
Valentika
The-IT-Guy-And-My-Secr etary
Hot 'N Sexy TexasMama
Lucky21
stainedclear
Antipova
Kikui
oldman
MissMarc
ToyTimeTim
B8trDude
redvinylkitty
ToyTimeTim
Miss Voluptuous
Kindred
Hot 'N Sexy Texasmama

As you can see over a 20 week period, only 3 people were repeat winners. I think many of the same reviewers are frequently nominated, but they don't necessarily win each time.

Havind said that, I do agree that it would be nice to hide names to prevent any favoritism. I would also like it if the results were not visible until you cast your vote to avoid being influenced by the current results.
02/11/2012
Cookie Monster Mike Cookie Monster Mike
Quote:
Originally posted by Kindred
I'm not sure I agree that the same contributors keep winning the Rumbles. Looking back at the last 20 weeks, here are the winners:

PassionateLover2
Cookie Monster Mike
sktb0007
Cookie Monster ... More
I think you nailed it right on the head. This would be absolutely perfect! That way the only way you are going to recognize a review is if you knew in advance who it was by and what it was called!

I love the "not seeing the results till after you cast your vote". Because I can almost guarantee you that (some) people vote based on popularity, how many votes are already on the highest voted one and if they know the person.

It will be interesting to see what final changes are made in the review rumble!
02/11/2012
Adriana Ravenlust Adriana Ravenlust
Quote:
Originally posted by Antipova
I think I would also kind of like to see a new way to do the rumble where the contributors' names are not posted, just the title of the review. Of course people will know who wrote which review once they click through and read the reviews, but it ... More
Honestly? This. I vote for people who I like and almost never read the reviews.
02/11/2012
  • 1
  • 2
Total posts: 38
Unique posters: 25