Quality Control

1. Quality Control

   #1

   Not positive how to exactly implement it but here are my thoughts.
   
   All Submissions will go into a sort of queue that will be called recent submissions. It will become another catagory on the site and they will still be viewable by everybody (don't you think?) and have a seperate recent box on the right side of the front page.
   
   For a new submission to be put into the main database it has to be approved by a group selected people, maybe users that have five approved submissions get the power to vote on new submissions. Then these users will review the submission, vote yes or no, add a comment to improve the post if they vote no. Maybe after a certain amount of votes, if the submission got a certain percentage of yes votes then it is added to the main catagories. If it is voted no, every no and comment associated with it is sent to the submitter to correct or improve the post for submission.
   
   To be a voter for a catagory the registered user will have to have a certain amount of submissions. Depending on the quality of the submissions of the person I will be able to add a 'weight' to their vote so their vote will count more.
   
   Something like that anyway.

2. Handling New Ideas

   #2

   I agree with the premise, but disagree with the implementation. Instead of keeping the new post in a different area (too much work to keep up with that) date all posts. If the date is less that say ten days mark it as new, and subject to voting. Allow votes to be selected from a preset list of choices (i.e. agree/disagree scale or keeper/trash it scale). If the submission is hated and identified as such because it has collected ten 75 % “Hate it� marking then it is removed/deleted or place into a gallery of “Bad Ideas� (e.g. “Worst Submissions�)
   
   BUT, controversy is good/fun so if ten voters Love my idea and 12 voters Hate my idea, then that make for a good topic. As always the final and most decisive vote would rest with the moderator or webmaster.
   
   Voting could be decided by having “Love It� and “Hate It� votes cancel each other out and only counting the rest. So that if 100 users vote, and 40 “Love It� and 60 “Hate It� then the submission has a 20 “Hate it� vote but has achieved the minimum 100 votes to allow for a good cross section of the voters. That way a message does not get killed just because the first 20 voters “Hate It�
   
   :idea: drphluid

3. Quality Control

   #3

   I like the idea that unpopular posts be consigned to a gallery of their own rather than deleted outright: even though it may be unpopular and badly written it could still inspire someone to come up with a better modified version which would be more popular. That's if you don't mind giving up the server space, strolen!

4. Quality Control

   #4

   Well, at the moment I have the voting from 1-10 in place. Could easily enough modify it to anything.
   
   For the yeah or nay vote we could have a tally the numbers for each or an overall number. Start at 0, yeah increments nay decreases it. Anything in the negative (-) range could be the "reject" Perhaps start it with 5 points or something and if it makes it into the - then it becomes a "bad" submission.
   
   Looking at it a little harder though, and it was mentioned in a couple different places....even a bad plot could have a seed of an idea that somebody could sprout into a campaign.
   
   There is one plot about running away from a dragon or something like that. Does nothing but put a situation out there and is not really a plot. Not very good, but doesn't it get your mind running with questions that you can't help answering or trying to answer? Is that valuable? I will let you decide.
   
   So upon further thinking I am a little timid in creating the rejection or going to the dump pile type thing. Brainstorming I sort of liked it, and haven't completely ruled it out, but I am now more leaning on just leaving the votes the way the are. If it has low votes it doesn't take up much bandwidth to show the summary of a crappy plot and worst that could happen if they see the bad rating is they skip it.
   
   Perhaps in the future when there is more content to choose from we can be more picky. Those with votes below whatever amount we decide could be pruned from the database very easily and at that time put in a 'reject' pile for editing or to be forgotten. Maybe? Who knows. Still in the decision process for this one.

5. Quality Control

   #5

   I don't think you should use a 10 point scale to rate. You will end up
   with a EPR like system. Worse yet are people who NEVER give a 10.
   Maybe a simpler system like "Like it", "Neutral", or "Don't like it".
   Those are very simple and hard to misunderstand. The user can always
   elaborate with their stupid comment oops I mean comments.

   
   
   Sent by email and it is a good point. I don't even know how to vote on a 10 point scale. Not sure about only 3 votes either, but I don't think I like 5, but you have to have a middle man so 4 won't do either.
   
   1 Don't Like it
   2 Like it a Little
   3 It is OK
   4 This is a good one
   5 Awesome, hope I can use it.
   
   Or just use 1,3,5.
   
   Was also tossing about a experience point type deal for the submissions. Maybe just have running total that tallies the votes. Maybe not. More votes, more experience higher rating till it works its way through the levels and becomes Ubersubmission. :shock:

6. Quality Control

   #6

   Whats an "EPR" :?:
   
   :?

7. Quality Control

   #7

   It is an OPR but with an E. Or a EPQ but with an R.
   
   :wink:

Bug Reports · All categories · Guildhall