Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[OTR-jkl]

FWIW-
WoMP is reviewed anonymously then the submissions are identified after discussions are completed...

[Pingu]

Yes i think to be totally objective the submissions should be treated as "subjects".



ha!




What ever you guys want im easy.

[Pingu]

So guys, are we going to alter things at all?

Or are we going to continue as we are?

[bblackwood]

We're going to rename/renumber them.

Eliminating bias is a sure-fire way to get honest answers.

[Pingu]

Cool.


Some guys brought up some good points against this, but i think this will be better for everyone.

[Patrik T]

I have a question;

The man behind a master, how shall he handle the commenting of his own submission in order to not reveal that it is his submission?

Best Regards
Patrik

[UnderTow]

I'll have a hard time not trying to recognise my own version. Not because I have any issues with any comments or anything like that but just because it is an extra little challenge.

Alistair

[Patrik T]

Nulling tests, Alistair!

 

Jokin'


BR
Patrik

[Pingu]

That's why i think that we should wait a week till after all are uploaded.

Then i think that we should only download one at a time and then make that entry the topic of discussion over a period of time and then so on.

This might be better than getting bomb barded with heaps of masters.


I think we we should commit to not using DAWS or anything of that nature that will aid us in recognizing our own master.

It would be good if we could all forget our own entry.

I will make sure i don't deliberately identify my own, and i would like to not recognize it also.

[Patrik T]

Pingu wrote on Tue, 20 June 2006 23:08

It would be good if we could all forget our own entry.

Hasn't this always been the case with WxMP?

[cerberus]

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 20 June 2006 16:25

We're going to rename/renumber them. Eliminating bias is a sure-fire way to get honest answers.

did i miss when we put this issue to a vote?


number thirteen

[MT Groove]

We can also play a little strategic guessing game based on the characteristics of previous masters to see if we can guess which file belongs to who?  

[bblackwood]

cerberus wrote on Tue, 20 June 2006 18:47

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 20 June 2006 16:25 We're going to rename/renumber them. Eliminating bias is a sure-fire way to get honest answers. did i miss when we put this issue to a vote? number thirteen

I don't think you missed it.

Call it a benevolent dictatorship.

[cerberus]

considering all the traffic wump has brought to your forum over the past 2 months, i would expect more accountability. imo, you were already getting a fair piece of our action.

jeff dinces

[bblackwood]

cerberus wrote on Tue, 20 June 2006 19:54

considering all the traffic wump has brought to your forum over the past 2 months, i would expect more accountability. imo, you were already getting a fair piece of our action.

I've never been one to pander for numbers, Jeff. It's not like I benefit from doing this.

Fact is, anonymous is the best way to do this. I know, as I've been doing these exact things since about 2002. I imagine you can get past your dislike the anonymous aspect of this and will realize that it is actually better.

But no, my forum is not a democracy. Never has been, never will be. I hope that my policies make people feel at home and help them expand their abilities, but will always do what I think is best for the benefit of the forum as an avenue for teaching and learning, never in some crass attempt at 'numbers'. I know this is the complete opposite of most forums who do whatever it takes for numbers in order to sell ad-space, but it has worked for me for six years now.

I hope you continue to enjoy the forum.