[inquiry]

A new BPO- poll is coming out this Thursday. We will have two guest solvers on the panel, Poky who won the last context, and Chernado who won two weeks ago, and posted the highest score (tied wtih Fred) among the panelist last month, so he gets re-invited.

With summer here, some of our favorite panelist maybe away.If there are any other gold stars who you want to compete in the contest, have them contact me for a copy of the weeks contest hands. Ideally the new gold stars will become posters on this forum as well. :-)

Ben

[joker_gib]

inquiry, on Jul 5 2005, 06:11 PM, said:

With summer here, some of our favorite panelist maybe away.

Not only panelists go away !

I think I will also go away for some days !

Have fun all !

Alain

[whereagles]

Oh, by the way. I haven't been following developments in this sub-forum, but I'd like to suggest something (if that hasn't already been done). Since Elianna keeps track of our choices, why not posting a table with everybody's scores after each poll closes and is scored?

[helene_t]

whereagles, on Jul 6 2005, 11:04 AM, said:

Since Elianna keeps track of our choices, why not posting a table with everybody's scores after each poll closes and is scored?

This has allready been discussed in this thread.

[Elianna]

helene_t, on Jul 6 2005, 02:09 AM, said:

whereagles, on Jul 6 2005, 11:04 AM, said:

Since Elianna keeps track of our choices, why not posting a table with everybody's scores after each poll closes and is scored?

This has allready been discussed in this thread.

While I agree that the question of which scores are going to be posted is discussed in that thread, what is NOT going to be discussed (or at least, I won't be listening to arguments for this) is posting each individual contestant's answers and/or scores.

I may have said it elsewhere (or else privately to people) but just in case it's not clear, I will not post individual contestant's answers and/or scores (unless the individual comes in above median, then a score will be posted, but not individual answers). The reason I don't want to post by individual contest is because there are enough (and to me this is at least one) people who would be intimidated by having their answers shown. Make a poll, do whatever you want to try to show me that people are in favor, I know several who just would not participate if I changed this.

I feel that if people want their answers known, they can post them in the thread relevant to that question. Since I will give totals for each bid, you wouldn't have to individually count what people post.

[whereagles]

Ok, so where's the table with scores of people who got above average in the first 3 editions?

Incidently, I think all that vote (panelists and regular posters) should have their score in the table. The individual bids needn't be there, but I really think ALL should enter the table. If you don't want you name there.. well, then don't vote

[inquiry]

whereagles, on Jul 6 2005, 09:09 AM, said:

Incidently, I think all that vote (panelists and regular posters) should have their score in the table. The individual bids needn't be there, but I really think ALL should enter the table. If you don't want you name there.. well, then don't vote

This simpily is not going to happen. Elianna was quite clear on this issue, and I agree. If you want to post your score, and say, "I scored 530" or whatever, feel free. But we are not going to post the scores, I did find it interesting to see how the members voted compared to the experts. On some hands there was excellent agreement, on others, not so much. There is probably as much to be learned by looking at those hands were there is a large difference as anything else. So I would like to keep the table of votes from non-panelist. But not at the cost of loss of privacy. I fully support Elianna's position. IT might be interetstin to see that the ACBL has recently raised the issue of if it is even legal to post recap sheets in tournments with users names and ACBL numbers (see rec.games.bridge today for details).

[Elianna]

whereagles, on Jul 6 2005, 06:09 AM, said:

Ok, so where's the table with scores of people who got above average in the first 3 editions?

The LIST is at http://forums.bridge...?showtopic=8520 .

whereagles said:

If you don't want you name there.. well, then don't vote

I view it as a CONTEST, not a vote. (The winner of a vote would be the subject being voted upon. The winner of a contest is someone who sends in their decisions.)

If you want to go around telling people not to participate, go ahead. While you're at it, find someone else to tabulate everything, because this is something I feel strongly about: Telling people that they shouldn't participate because they will get embarrassed is WRONG, they shouldn't be punished for trying, and this is NOT something that I would want to be connected to in anyway.

whereagles said:

I think all that vote (panelists and regular posters) should have their score in the table

The panelist's votes (they count as votes, btw, not answers or entries, see explanation above) are in a table, posted by Ben, at the link above.

Who should determine if they are regular posters? You, me? What determines a regular poster? Posting once a day? posting once a month? having 400 posts?

[flytoox]

whereagles, on Jul 6 2005, 01:09 PM, said:

If you don't want you name there.. well, then don't vote

This is ridiculous I must say. I want to vote, but I dont want my score to be posted.

[bearmum]

flytoox, on Jul 7 2005, 11:21 AM, said:

whereagles, on Jul 6 2005, 01:09 PM, said:

If you don't want you name there.. well, then don't vote

This is ridiculous I must say. I want to vote, but I dont want my score to be posted.

ITA I will participate even though I get most of them wrong, and really enjoy reading the threads later -- Appreciation to Ben and Elianna for their work

BTw maybe I missed it but do the panel [through Elianna] award points (for the bids made by the PANEL only) eg 2♥ =100 2NT =80 something else =x as they do in several bridge magazines?

[whereagles]

Ben and Elianna: well, I understand what you mean, but then please tell me what is the purpose of voting if not to get a score in the end? I, for one, am not going to bother sending Elianna a message every poll unless my score is calculated and processed into a table for comparision.

What I am saying is that I would like to see, together with the table for panelists, a table for all non-panelists who cast their vote. Unless this is put to practice, I consider casting a vote via private message an inconsequential act and an exercise in futility. After all, I could have looked at the problems in the treads and give my opinion there, a much more constructive action because at least it adds to the discussion.

But ok, I'm not saying you should do it my way. I'm just telling you why I, under the present circumstances, won't be messaging my vote

[helene_t]

whereagles, on Jul 7 2005, 11:58 AM, said:

please tell me what is the purpose of voting if not to get a score in the end? I, for one, am not going to bother sending Elianna a message every poll unless my score is calculated and processed into a table for comparision.

Well, of course it's irrational to answer any questions at all unless you're a professional consultant or a participant in the "Who wants to become a milionaire"-quiz. So why bother participating in online quizes or answering your neighbour's silly "How are you?" questions?

But for some reason it seems to be intrinsic to human nature to ask and answer questions, especially about opinion. I think the function of this is to create social bonds. If I ask you about something then I show you that I value your opinion which means that we could also exchange information on more serious matters, for mutual benifit.

In this particular case, you get the chance of influencing the picture other BBF-readers get of the concensus regarding BBO-advanced. This could move the concensus a tiny bit in your direction and make future pick-up partners more likely to understand your bidding.

Also consider that you have the chance of becoming famous if you're above the median. If you're not, you will not be listed, so you get the chance of fame for free.

I, for one, continue to participate because it's fun. I'm not a psychologist so I don't know for sure why I think it's fun but it doesn't matter.

I'm sorry to hear that you will not participate, Whereagles, I think your opinions on bidding issues are sound and you could make a positive contribution to the poll.

[mr1303]

I agree with Whereagles on this one. I'd quite like to see everyone's scores and opinions, so I can compare myself with players of more my ability, rather than the internationals.

Incidently, I don't see why an "opt-out" procedure couldn't be effective. Those who really don't want their scores published can ask Elianna to not publish them, but if they don't ask, then they are published?

This would seem to solve both sides of the dispute with no cost, as far as I'm aware.

[whereagles]

helene_t, on Jul 7 2005, 10:16 AM, said:

whereagles, on Jul 7 2005, 11:58 AM, said:

please tell me what is the purpose of voting if not to get a score in the end? I, for one, am not going to bother sending Elianna a message every poll unless my score is calculated and processed into a table for comparision.

Well, of course it's irrational to answer any questions at all unless you're a professional consultant or a participant in the "Who wants to become a milionaire"-quiz. So why bother participating in online quizes or answering your neighbour's silly "How are you?" questions?

But for some reason it seems to be intrinsic to human nature to ask and answer questions, especially about opinion. I think the function of this is to create social bonds. If I ask you about something then I show you that I value your opinion which means that we could also exchange information on more serious matters, for mutual benifit.

In this particular case, you get the chance of influencing the picture other BBF-readers get of the concensus regarding BBO-advanced. This could move the concensus a tiny bit in your direction and make future pick-up partners more likely to understand your bidding.

Also consider that you have the chance of becoming famous if you're above the median. If you're not, you will not be listed, so you get the chance of fame for free.

I, for one, continue to participate because it's fun. I'm not a psychologist so I don't know for sure why I think it's fun but it doesn't matter.

I'm sorry to hear that you will not participate, Whereagles, I think your opinions on bidding issues are sound and you could make a positive contribution to the poll.

Ahem... I don't quite follow this psychologists' speech of yours, so let me just comment on your last sentence. I *am* going to participate, but I'll give my bids on the threads themselves, not by sending Elianna a message.

[flytoox]

whereagles, on Jul 7 2005, 09:58 AM, said:

Ben and Elianna: well, I understand what you mean, but then please tell me what is the purpose of voting if not to get a score in the end? I, for one, am not going to bother sending Elianna a message every poll unless my score is calculated and processed into a table for comparision.

What I am saying is that I would like to see, together with the table for panelists, a table for all non-panelists who cast their vote. Unless this is put to practice, I consider casting a vote via private message an inconsequential act and an exercise in futility. After all, I could have looked at the problems in the treads and give my opinion there, a much more constructive action because at least it adds to the discussion.

But ok, I'm not saying you should do it my way. I'm just telling you why I, under the present circumstances, won't be messaging my vote

I think you can see the summary statistics in current system. You can also get your score and compare it with panelists'.

mr103's suggestion is reasonable, but i think it probablly will add Elianna's workload. After all, he is doing a no pay job. This is not so easy.


Perhaps in the future the voting system will generate the result automatically rather than do it mannually. Also, it should set no revelation as default rather than revelation as default. I would bet most votes prefer not to be posted.

[Elianna]

flytoox said:

mr1303's suggestion is reasonable, but i think it probablly will add Elianna's workload. After all, he is doing a no pay job. This is not so easy.

Thank you for your sympathy. I just wanted to say that I am in the minority of posters: I am a "she".

While it will not actually GREATLY add to my workload (by far the hardest part is determing what people's answers actually ARE), I appreciate your concern. And yes, mr1303 having an "opt in" option, rather than an "opt out" would make more sense.

However, I still don't understand the need to see contestant's answers shown in a table. The same people who would opt in to having their answers printed probably greatly align with those that post their answers. You also get totals of what all contestants voted for (found in the threads where each question is posted). I don't really see what having a table would accomplish, except be more annoying for me (figuring out formatting, pulling out those who do not wish for their answers to be displayed, etc.) and cut down on reading what people posted.

Also, I STILL don't agree with the idea that people submitting answers to me are VOTING. They are COMPETING. If you disagree with me (and I believe that I know several people that do) that's fine, I don't really think that it makes a difference in the end result if people disagree on this point, but I just wanted to make myself clear on what my feelings are on this subject.

[whereagles]

Elianna, on Jul 7 2005, 01:07 PM, said:

However, I still don't understand the need to see contestant's answers shown in a table.

Well, think of it like this: do you actually do something with the messages you receive? If not, then why should we even send them?

[Elianna]

whereagles, on Jul 7 2005, 06:23 AM, said:

Elianna, on Jul 7 2005, 01:07 PM, said:

However, I still don't understand the need to see contestant's answers shown in a table.

Well, think of it like this: do you actually do something with the messages you receive? If not, then why should we even send them?

This question makes no sense. What do you mean, what do I do?

I score everyone's answers and determine a winner. I also now compile the answers per question, and post them in each question thread.

I think that maybe you need to look around this forum a bit more carefully.

[mr1303]

I think the point is, this is all well and good if you won the thing, but if you aren't that great (like me) then we'd quite like to know how we actually did.

OK, I'll speak for myself: I'd like to know how I did, and preferably in comparison to the other users. If we have to work out our scores from the values given when the results are posted by Ben, we don't gain anything from giving you our answers, unless we win.

[Elianna]

mr1303, on Jul 7 2005, 06:35 AM, said:

I think the point is, this is all well and good if you won the thing, but if you aren't that great (like me) then we'd quite like to know how we actually did.

OK, I'll speak for myself: I'd like to know how I did, and preferably in comparison to the other users. If we have to work out our scores from the values given when the results are posted by Ben, we don't gain anything from giving you our answers, unless we win.

As I have said before, the value is in competing.

Take for example "The Bridge World"'s Master Solver Panel: For those of you not acquainted with it, every month you send in your answers to the contest. If you did well (and there it is EXTREMELY well) your score is listed. If you didn't, it is up to you to calculate what you received. I know that I am not likely to do well for even a monthly contest, much less the yearly sum of all the monthly contests. Yet why do I participate? It's fun to compete.

You also get a comparison of where you placed in this competition: if your name is not listed, you did equal to or worse than the half the people that competed.

If you would really like to know where you stood (ie, what place) you may message me, like others have.