Hi guys,
I'm not really sure if we're still talking WMPT "voting" tool, I'm
assuming it is.
My comments go inline.
Em 07-08-2012 20:55, maarten deneckere escreveu:
Hey all,
my opinion, based on the 7000 images last year in Belgium.
1/ some preprocessing. Remove images that are too small, have no
emailaddress linked to their account, they cannot participate, ...
I think I forgot to mention... I actually did a script to filter out
some images that didn't match a minimum quality. I found that they were
not many, though, so I'm not sure if I even used it or not.
2/ User generated voting. Two types of votes:
* *failed images* (we need to define and explain this very well!)
Three "-1" mean the image is removed from the contest. This cleans
up the list of images, so people voting at the end will see less
images then the first ones. This greatly improves the voting.
This step was actually done by the community: we had a group of
volunteers "validating" directly in Commons with a Javascript tool which
images were "accepted" to the contest (visual quality issues like
blurring, distortion, etc would require too much time to develop).
* *favourite images of the voter*. Every selected
image is giving 1/N
points (N being the number of votes giving by this users*). People
who select a limited amount of images will impact one image more
then somebody who selects almost all images.
That's why I think it's important to set a "maximum" number of images to
leave in Bucket 2 (consider this bucket as the voter's "finalists"), and
leave that sorting responsibility to the "voter".
Bear in mind that I find "voter" and "voting" misleading. Voting is
typically assigned to "election" (the winner is who gets more votes) and
that's not really the case in Phase 1 (like described before) which is
simply a "pre-selection".
Regards,
-NT
3/ The final selection happens by the judges (you
cannot replace this by
user voting). They only see the best 100-200 images.
Regards,
Maarten
* for the mathematicians, I would keep 10 < N < 100, to avoid strange
results when people only select one image, and to give more credit to
people selecting more than 100 images.
2012/8/7 Lodewijk <lodewijk(a)effeietsanders.org
<mailto:lodewijk@effeietsanders.org>>
Yeah, it won't be easy :) But with big numbers it might be the only
way. One possible way is to only allow two scores: 1 or 0 (and
skip). And then take the average instead of the sum. That way you
should be able to get the most wonderful images on top - we don't
need to rank everything, but should only make sure that the top-25
images are within the selection of 500.
Lodewijk
2012/8/7 Platonides <platonides(a)gmail.com <mailto:platonides@gmail.com>>
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Lodewijk
<lodewijk(a)effeietsanders.org
<mailto:lodewijk@effeietsanders.org>> wrote:
My idea of making the number of jury members in a
particular
round infinite,
was that we could hand out a jury token to each
community
member easily, and
let them process 100-1000 images. If enough
people do that,
and if the
distribution is either random or based on the
pictures that
have the least
votes, that should give a somewhat (not perfect)
workflow.
Hope that makes sense,
Lodewijk
I stand on my point that it would be hard. :-)
Not really in the tool supporting so many "juries", which would be
simple, but in processing that.
You could easily augment the data points by storing which images
where
viewed by a single user and if it was +1, -1, or skipped. We could
also assume that all members are honest wikimedians and nobody is
trying to game to contest.
You end up with a pool of images ranked (eg. 1-10) by 1,000
different users.
How do you get the top-10/100/500 images?
The image some gave 10 points to, would barely have received 5 by
others, and viceversa...
_______________________________________________
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
WikiLovesMonuments(a)lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
_______________________________________________
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
WikiLovesMonuments(a)lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
_______________________________________________
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
WikiLovesMonuments(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org