I wanted to ask what you think of a possible change to the scoring of the weekly challenges.
Right now most of the scoring is based on who gets the most upvotes. It works well for keeping things impartial, but those who post early will get more views and more chances at being upvoted than those who post later.
We already try to make things fairer by awarding bonus points to the last two images and a penalty for posting within the first 24 hours.
That last one got some feedback with some valid points, so I would like to suggest something different.

I want to see if having a separate submission and scoring post might work for the next challenge. Everyone can submit their images for at least 7 days and then I put them all together in a new post with separate replies to let people vote for at least 24 hours. Maybe even wait with posting until the weekend to get the most out of it?
I’d be happy to hear your input on this. It’s a bit more work, but I don’t mind doing it if it makes things more fair. And I hope I can automate the tedious stuff.

Nothing much changes on your end, but it might make the whole experience more fun and less of a race :)

edit

Thank you so much for your input and appreciation. I’ve heard some great arguments and will keep these in mind.
I’m going to give this a try for the coming challenge. But to whoever wins next, feel free to ignore all of this and try something different for the challenge after this.
Just know I’m always happy to help out in whatever way possible.

  • Trollivier@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    4·
    2 months ago

    I was about to make the same suggestion. But the extra step will be a lot to manage. Not an easy problem.

    I wish there was more participants or voters. But that would make the initial problem bigger. And the solution harder to find.

  • Ziggurat@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    4·
    2 months ago

    Thanks for your work, on making the weekly challenge happening.

    I am a bit worried by logistic of having a thread for the “entries” and a thread the next week for the votes (Might be manageable with a script/bot) not sure whether you (or someone else) has the bandwidth to manage it.

    for the rest, not sure whether we need to review the weight to limit the upvote weight compared to the extra points, or whether we shall accept a “first to posts wins” type of challenge, yesterday I try to add a PSA message, but don’t feel like it changed much the outcome

    • Thelsim@sh.itjust.worksOPMEnglish
      3·
      2 months ago

      I already perform the weekly tallies with a script, it takes about 5 minutes of my time to create and review the results.

      Though I will admit this is a bit more involved. Creating the voting thread would definitely have to be automated, together with tallying the scores afterwards. It’s doable, but will take me some time.

      I guess this suggestion mostly stems from wanting a level playing field. There’s often a lot of great late-entry results that don’t get the traction they deserve. The extra points for last two has some limitations, and the penalty for early entries has its own downside.
      I know we all play for the fun of it, but I wish it could all be about what you post and not about how fast.
      So to me the most logical solution seemed to be to let voting begin for everyone at the same time.

      Then again, I know no solution is perfect. I’d like the challenge to remain fun and accessible to everyone, that’s my main concern.

      I couldn’t find your PSA though?

    • merde alors@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      3·
      2 months ago

      i think it did. I was winning until you posted your psa message 😅

      agreed with you on “we shall accept a “first to posts wins” type of challenge”. @thelsim@sh.itjust.works 's solutions would be too much work for a challenge with 8 entries.

      I feel like, correct me if i’m wrong, most (if not all) of us participate for the fun of it. Winning would just change the way you play the next round but does it really matter who wins?

      • Thelsim@sh.itjust.worksOPMEnglish
        4·
        2 months ago

        That’s true, and I guess this is partly about wanting everyone’s work to be seen.
        Most people browse at last 6 or 12 hours, and will miss the submissions. After about 24 hours it dies out and only community members still visit.

        I figured it would be nice to also use the challenge as a way to showcase everyone’s work. Because all of you deserve it.

  • ✧✨🌿Allo🌿✨✧@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    3·
    2 months ago

    https://sh.itjust.works/post/25716230 here’s merde’s recent post. I would like to ask that ‘not sharing prompt results in less points’ be looked at and possibly changed. Not all of us have the same image making process and some of us vary significantly. My own process is different from merde’s, but also ‘when i create an image with a logical, on topic, shareable prompt’, as I do for most of the challenges, it often is a subpar image compared to if I had created the image naturally, in my own style.

    details

    my generator is like a witches brew where what is thrown in may have little to do with what is generated. It cares about maximum beauty and that the result is beautiful matters more than closeness to prompt. I could type ‘unicorn’ and my image have no unicorns and be, instead, a perfect space scene for the challenge. Because promptsharing is tied to points, I often, instead, submit worse pictures but with a legit prompt.

    It is weird to me that this aspect of points is tied to what the person’s personal style is, and I think that shouldn’t be the case.

    • Thelsim@sh.itjust.worksOPMEnglish
      3·
      2 months ago

      You make a good point, and I’m fine with dropping that one.
      It was originally included to encourage sharing of workflows and prompts. Some of us are new at this, or appreciate a peek in the kitchen (sorry, bad Dutch expression :) to get some inspiration.
      But I agree that it doesn’t mean that people should be penalized for having complex workflows.