/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

NoxVS wrote:

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

NoxVS wrote: It’s not the polls fault that people are too stupid to understand how to order choices depending on how much you like or dislike the option.

It It is likely that the poll is less tainted than if it was a non-IRV poll but it's still (more subtly) tainted

How would it be tainted. It would literally be a yes/no at that point. How do you taint “do you want cats? yes or no”

Because it's a "yes/no" containing votes that were affected by the presence of now-removed options, since people are not obligated to follow the "Order options from most liked to least liked" instructions of an IRV poll

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

NoxVS wrote:

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

NoxVS wrote: It’s not the polls fault that people are too stupid to understand how to order choices depending on how much you like or dislike the option.

It It is likely that the poll is less tainted than if it was a non-IRV poll but it's still (more subtly) tainted

How would it be tainted. It would literally be a yes/no at that point. How do you taint “do you want cats? yes or no”

Because it's a "yes/no" containing votes that were affected by the presence of now-removed options, since people are not obligated to follow the "Order options from most liked to least liked" instructions of an IRV poll

Well those people are morons who can’t follow simple instructions and likely part of a minority who shouldn’t be catered too.

So part of this drama is due to the poll containing Double Barrel questions, which is a big no no for IRV.

This become more problematic since the IRV contained 4 against and 1 for choice. Mathematically it meant that it was inevitable for a against choice to win since 3 of the 4 against included double barrel options.

It should be telling that the sole pro option lasted until the final round.

delaron wrote:So part of this drama is due to the poll containing Double Barrel questions, which is a big no no for IRV.

This become more problematic since the IRV contained 4 against and 1 for choice. Mathematically it meant that it was inevitable for a against choice to win since 3 of the 4 against included double barrel options.

It should be telling that the sole pro option lasted until the final round.

Also why was there not a option to null vote remaining options? A none of the above/remaining if you will. Then mark the winning vote as requiring a percentage of valid votes. Normal bar is 50%

1. preferred option
2. agreeable option
3. I dont like anything after these two so stop adding my vote.

-Winning vote would need 50% of total votes to be considered the "winning vote"

But the major issue was again the Double Barrel reward bias.

Since some are attacking the person bringing part of this up as an alt account I figure it may be easier to express a similar point as someone with no alt accounts.

If you eliminate the etherals option in the first round (redistributing it's votes to the other preferred options in the order people select), removal still wins post filtering for playtime and it's still close so we'd still implement a compromise matching the one in the OP

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

subject217 wrote:Hello digg!

actually a serious post: when one choice wins by a relatively slim margin, going "all the way" with it will piss off far more people than a compromise, all you delusional redditoids were never going to get anything better than this really

That's right, you have to make everyone unhappy. That's why when the presidential candidate wins with a 51% majority they only make him kinda-president.
Also, on the ballot, the options look like this:

1) Elect George
2) Elect Bob
3) Elect Jim and you get a new car (only guaranteed if you elect Jim though)

Late reply, but I forgot to make an important point here.

Everything about this 2nd poll was 100% headmin sanctioned from start to finish. Every single option that was offered in the poll was reviewed and approved by every headmin. It's the headmins' responsibility to see that the poll was unbiased. Make of that what you will.

It's not even biased, people are just looking for any angle to try to change the outcome, it's getting very silly now because every single thing raised has been comprehensively proven incorrect, wrong or just outright misleading.

The point is that oranges wasn't the sole arbiter of the voting options that afelinidisfinetoo is so mad about - they were collectively discussed and individually approved by all headmins.

Maybe the real removal of felinids was the friends we made along the way

Just for completeness's sake and just to shut people up even more, I asked mso to change the code so I can filter both of those options out at the first step, redistributing their votes as per the priority order people selected.




See, no amount of so called "bribery" was going to change the outcome at any point, all it did was allow people to express that they were still interested in new races and wanted to trade, which is a perfectly reasonable thing and exactly what this poll option was supposed to indicate.

oranges wrote:...

You cannot just remove the bribery options from the poll and in doing so erase their impact on it. See the conversation chain just a few posts above you.
Also, whether or not the bribery options affected the poll (they did) is irrelevant to the fact that they are bribery, you knew they were bribery, and you tried to sweeten the bribery by making it as clear as possible that etherals would *only* get a guaranteed merge if felinids lost the poll.

delaron wrote: Also why was there not a option to null vote remaining options? A none of the above/remaining if you will. Then mark the winning vote as requiring a percentage of valid votes. Normal bar is 50%

THe whole point of the poll is to be decisive, the null vote (or the vote for the status quo) was to vote for no removal, that's explictly the null vote, the rest are expressions of what kind of change from the status quo you might want to see.

Adding extra null vote options beyond that point both defeats the point of having a decisive poll and makes the voting result unclear for absolutely no benefit.

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

oranges wrote:...

You cannot just remove the bribery options from the poll and in doing so erase their impact on it. See the conversation chain just a few posts above you.
Also, whether or not the bribery options affected the poll (they did) is irrelevant to the fact that they are bribery, you knew they were bribery, and you tried to sweeten the bribery by making it as clear as possible that etherals would *only* get a guaranteed merge if felinids lost the poll.

This is very desperate and reaching now, you're suggesting that the impact of the two unrelated vote options will change the preferred order someone would rank the remaining options, it might be a an open psychological question, but I doubt the change would rise above the polling noise.

Stop embarrassing yourself

oranges wrote:

delaron wrote: Also why was there not a option to null vote remaining options? A none of the above/remaining if you will. Then mark the winning vote as requiring a percentage of valid votes. Normal bar is 50%

THe whole point of the poll is to be decisive, the null vote (or the vote for the status quo) was to vote for no removal, that's explictly the null vote,

This is not what a null vote is

oranges wrote:

delaron wrote: Also why was there not a option to null vote remaining options? A none of the above/remaining if you will. Then mark the winning vote as requiring a percentage of valid votes. Normal bar is 50%

THe whole point of the poll is to be decisive, the null vote (or the vote for the status quo) was to vote for no removal, that's explictly the null vote, the rest are expressions of what kind of change from the status quo you might want to see.

Adding extra null vote options beyond that point both defeats the point of having a decisive poll and makes the voting result unclear for absolutely no benefit.

I'm not convinced.

Can you re-do the filtering but this time add like five or seven more possible options

It doesn't really matter what they are

oranges wrote: I doubt the change would rise above the polling noise.

Thanks, but I don't trust your doubts when you have made it super, super clear that you are biased and wanted felinids to lose.

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

oranges wrote:

delaron wrote: Also why was there not a option to null vote remaining options? A none of the above/remaining if you will. Then mark the winning vote as requiring a percentage of valid votes. Normal bar is 50%

THe whole point of the poll is to be decisive, the null vote (or the vote for the status quo) was to vote for no removal, that's explictly the null vote,

This is not what a null vote is

If you did not care about this vote at all, you should vote for the option that keeps the status quo, that's why there is no (I don't care) option on this poll, because it is supposed to be a decisive poll that gives us an outcome, not just an indication that the majority of people don't care (which would simply leave the result up to us to decide).

oranges wrote:It's not even biased, people are just looking for any angle to try to change the outcome, it's getting very silly now because every single thing raised has been comprehensively proven incorrect, wrong or just outright misleading.

Hey now lets put a deep freeze on the attacks and assumptions. If you want to go into personal motivations; I personally don't play the cat race and I honest have only the slightest inclination to keep them. While it doesn't affect me keeping them in leads to others being happy. Looking at the opposite of making people happy they are taken away offer less overall to the community as the option to not play a cat race is there for them.

For me its similar to saying I don't like the color orange and thus we need to remove the sprites with orange in them. Ive asked for a code based reason why they are specifically being targeted for removal and in general have been ignored.

The items I bring up regarding the poll's faults themselves are more for educational purposes. The poll, regardless of who approved or reviewed it, are in my observation and opinion fundamentally flawed from a mathematical and psychological point of view for the reasons I previously stated.

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

oranges wrote:

delaron wrote: Also why was there not a option to null vote remaining options? A none of the above/remaining if you will. Then mark the winning vote as requiring a percentage of valid votes. Normal bar is 50%

THe whole point of the poll is to be decisive, the null vote (or the vote for the status quo) was to vote for no removal, that's explictly the null vote,

This is not what a null vote is

You had a null vote button, it is called "don't hit the vote button"

whatever dude, I've spent enough time humouring the alt and their 2 month play time and frankly at this point it's just sour grapes.

oranges wrote:whatever dude, I've spent enough time humouring the alt and their 2 month play time and frankly at this point it's just sour grapes.

Don't forget ignoring the non alt and slinging personal attack and guesses to motivation. Is it difficult to have a civil discussion and back and forth about the merit of the poll and motivations behind it?

It was troubling to see you put the data in motion that if you remove the double barrel question it would lead to x result. That is not how it works, its not how any of this works. That isnt the setup at the time of the vote and filtering it out makes the data even more suspect.

I acknowledge your point about the decision to exclude a null option. Was this also your opinion for not including null option after picking your primary choices? Normally this allows for easier extrapolation of exactly what you were trying to do. Null options make it much clearer where the voting base generally is leaning to. This helps parse an IRV with additional benchamarks of agreement.

Again while I prefer the cat race stay in as its content is enjoyed/accepted by at minimum 203 active players, the inclusion of double barrel options and not including a null after option seems less genuine and more of a going through the motions exercise. Which doesn't make much sense to me. The compromise solution works but likely would not have been needed if the poll was structured in a more neutral fashion. This again being my opinion based on experience and general observation.

I also acknowledge this was potentially all a long game troll/meme on your part. If that is a source of enjoyment for you then /shrug carry on.

There's nothing more to respond to, every point raised does not match the data available and you keep raising the same issues like they're meaningful when they're not, removing both of the so called bribery options and redistributing people's votes in the order that they ranked everything still results in the outcome of removal, and would still lead to this compromise. You're literally suggesting that the very existence of those options would changes peoples preferences on the remaining options and they would rank them differently just because of the first two options. It just doesn't make sense as an argument of value.

You can talk about motivations and schemes all you fucking want but this was a 100% fairly done exercise and the outcome is just one you don't like.

The only person going through the motions here is you and afelinid who seems frankly pretty delusional.

Like I honestly don't even know why I bothered humouring people with this vote at all if people are just going to accuse me of bias for even raising a question and then seeing what the outcome is.

Don't worry though I've learned my lesson, next time I'll just decide by myself and merge whatever the change is, then you can call me biased and actually have a fucking point instead of just projecting your own insecurities on to me.

Explain how every point raised does not match the available data please. The bar to match my points are the inclusion of double barrel options and lack of a bull beyond this point option.

I'm not looking to change anything except future IRV polls and for you to acknowledge that it's not a question of fairness but tilted math. I am not saying you had any motive but rather asked what your motivation was. I made a statement that suggested it might be a mem or troll motivation but do not consider it a fact due to lack of confirmation though there is plenty of supporting evidence.

Also could you clear up if you are intending to say I'm delusional as well? The last comment made it seem as such. Which would be a shame seeing as I have made no dispersion to your character.

Yes you are delusional.

oranges wrote:Like I honestly don't even know why I bothered humouring people with this vote at all if people are just going to accuse me of bias for even raising a question and then seeing what the outcome is.

Don't worry though I've learned my lesson, next time I'll just decide by myself and merge whatever the change is, then you can call me biased and actually have a fucking point instead of just projecting your own insecurities on to me.

Oranges, you included two "Remove felinids and I add <x> popular new PR" options in a poll about whether or not felinids belong in the game, then you went out of your way to let everyone know that you would not be doing a guaranteed merge of those features unless felinids lost the poll. Why are you outraged that people are calling you biased? You are biased. A non-biased person would not have done these actions. In fact, a non-biased person would have left the issue alone after felinids won the previous two (three?) unbiased "Do felinids belong? Yes/No" polls.

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

oranges wrote:Like I honestly don't even know why I bothered humouring people with this vote at all if people are just going to accuse me of bias for even raising a question and then seeing what the outcome is.

Don't worry though I've learned my lesson, next time I'll just decide by myself and merge whatever the change is, then you can call me biased and actually have a fucking point instead of just projecting your own insecurities on to me.

Oranges, you included two "Remove felinids and I add <x> popular new PR" options in a poll about whether or not felinids belong in the game, then you went out of your way to let everyone know that you would not be doing a guaranteed merge of those features unless felinids lost the poll. Why are you outraged that people are calling you biased? You are biased. A non-biased person would not have done these actions. In fact, a non-biased person would have left the issue alone after felinids won the previous two (three?) unbiased "Do felinids belong? Yes/No" polls.

Oranges has much more strength and willpower then I do. Because after getting asked the same question 1000 times. I'd just start ignoring the person who kept asking it

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

oranges wrote:Like I honestly don't even know why I bothered humouring people with this vote at all if people are just going to accuse me of bias for even raising a question and then seeing what the outcome is.

Don't worry though I've learned my lesson, next time I'll just decide by myself and merge whatever the change is, then you can call me biased and actually have a fucking point instead of just projecting your own insecurities on to me.

Oranges, you included two "Remove felinids and I add <x> popular new PR" options in a poll about whether or not felinids belong in the game, then you went out of your way to let everyone know that you would not be doing a guaranteed merge of those features unless felinids lost the poll. Why are you outraged that people are calling you biased? You are biased. A non-biased person would not have done these actions. In fact, a non-biased person would have left the issue alone after felinids won the previous two (three?) unbiased "Do felinids belong? Yes/No" polls.

How is that biased, nothing in the game has a guaranteed merge, there's no guarantee that etherals would have made it in unless the outcome of the poll was that people wanted that.

They happened to be the nearest concrete example of another roundstart race that could potentially be merged. along with IPC's.

You were the only person lying and misrepresenting the facts of that situation by claiming etherals would be merged either way.

however the real flaw in your comments is that the last two polls were 12 months ago, in a game where we elect people who can completely change the face of the game every six months, if you actually cared about this as a point you would start by complaining about how short the headmin term is. But you don't, because this is just another thing you're desperately tossing against the wall in the hope that any of it somehow sticks and changes our minds.

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

oranges wrote:Like I honestly don't even know why I bothered humouring people with this vote at all if people are just going to accuse me of bias for even raising a question and then seeing what the outcome is.

Don't worry though I've learned my lesson, next time I'll just decide by myself and merge whatever the change is, then you can call me biased and actually have a fucking point instead of just projecting your own insecurities on to me.

Oranges, you included two "Remove felinids and I add <x> popular new PR" options in a poll about whether or not felinids belong in the game, then you went out of your way to let everyone know that you would not be doing a guaranteed merge of those features unless felinids lost the poll. Why are you outraged that people are calling you biased? You are biased. A non-biased person would not have done these actions. In fact, a non-biased person would have left the issue alone after felinids won the previous two (three?) unbiased "Do felinids belong? Yes/No" polls.

you have a stick so far up your ass that it sticks out of your mouth whenever you talk

oranges wrote:Yes you are

oranges wrote: How is that biased, nothing in the game has a guaranteed merge, there's no guarantee that etherals would have made it in unless the outcome of the poll was that people wanted that.

You know exactly how it's biased. You exercised your power as headcoder to influence the poll. There was absolutely no legitimate reason why etherals' implementation would be contingent on felinids being removed. The two features have no conflict and the roundstart race list is still tiny and filled with races that are less popular than felinids. You arranged things this way as a deliberate attempt at swaying the vote.

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

oranges wrote: How is that biased, nothing in the game has a guaranteed merge, there's no guarantee that etherals would have made it in unless the outcome of the poll was that people wanted that.

You know exactly how it's biased. You exercised your power as headcoder to influence the poll. There was absolutely no legitimate reason why etherals' implementation would be contingent on felinids being removed. The two features have no conflict and the roundstart race list is still tiny and filled with races that are less popular than felinids. You arranged things this way as a deliberate attempt at swaying the vote.

If oranges really had this much power you big old baiter from another server. Why wouldn't they exercise there supreme stealthy indirect control abilities to silence you

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

oranges wrote: How is that biased, nothing in the game has a guaranteed merge, there's no guarantee that etherals would have made it in unless the outcome of the poll was that people wanted that.

You know exactly how it's biased. You exercised your power as headcoder to influence the poll. There was absolutely no legitimate reason why etherals' implementation would be contingent on felinids being removed. The two features have no conflict and the roundstart race list is still tiny and filled with races that are less popular than felinids. You arranged things this way as a deliberate attempt at swaying the vote.

Breathe... if that was the case pretty sure the headadmins are smart enough and care enough to stop that before we ever saw it. This all seems like more of a over bureaucratic appeasement. The point was to say this didnt really give great data and was somewhat needlessly convoluted. However it is an opinion theater. Really if there is a actual removal pr down the road then submit a introduction pr if it bothers you. Right now its only a config change. I'm off my train so bowing out.

Steelpoint wrote:One potential future I can see is future head admins reverting the change and allowing Catpeople back as a round start race, as there is no assurance in the agreement noted that puts a timer on that.

Democracy is not a rachet, one of the core protections is the ability to undo the actions of your predecessors. I could see a candidate winning with this as a stump issue.

oranges wrote:There's nothing more to respond to, every point raised does not match the data available and you keep raising the same issues like they're meaningful when they're not, removing both of the so called bribery options and redistributing people's votes in the order that they ranked everything still results in the outcome of removal, and would still lead to this compromise. You're literally suggesting that the very existence of those options would changes peoples preferences on the remaining options and they would rank them differently just because of the first two options. It just doesn't make sense as an argument of value.

You can talk about motivations and schemes all you fucking want but this was a 100% fairly done exercise and the outcome is just one you don't like.

The only person going through the motions here is you and afelinid who seems frankly pretty delusional.

The alt's tactics are straight out of the alt-right playbook. Never play defense, oranges.

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

oranges wrote: How is that biased, nothing in the game has a guaranteed merge, there's no guarantee that etherals would have made it in unless the outcome of the poll was that people wanted that.

You know exactly how it's biased. You exercised your power as headcoder to influence the poll. There was absolutely no legitimate reason why etherals' implementation would be contingent on felinids being removed. The two features have no conflict and the roundstart race list is still tiny and filled with races that are less popular than felinids. You arranged things this way as a deliberate attempt at swaying the vote.

surely this is a better image to illustrate that

And why did we give hippie players almost a full month to rack up the 60 minute play time to pass the filter?

I thought it was mentioned that the vote was filtered in a way so that would not happen.

Zarniwoop wrote:And why did we give hippie players almost a full month to rack up the 60 minute play time to pass the filter?

mso literally filtered it out don't be stupid

iamgoofball wrote:straight out of the alt-right playbook

i wish goof would become a furry so he could make the other side look fucking retarded

Zarniwoop wrote:And why did we give hippie players almost a full month to rack up the 60 minute play time to pass the filter?

nvm they already have this guy

is this like the 4th fucking thread we've had on this

felinid man, defender of justice, catgirls, and all that is holy might have worse alzheimers than goof

iksyp wrote:felinid man, defender of justice, catgirls, and all that is holy might have worse alzheimers than goof

Yeah, he should just go to citadel if cats are the only reason he plays ss13

obscolene wrote:

iamgoofball wrote:straight out of the alt-right playbook

i wish goof would become a furry so he could make the other side look fucking retarded

Zarniwoop wrote:And why did we give hippie players almost a full month to rack up the 60 minute play time to pass the filter?

nvm they already have this guy

Are you going to keep pretending these aren't alt-right tactics getting used elsewhere?

wait... Damnit goofball now I'm confussed! The alt-right pro felinid? I would have bet money the alt-right was anti felinid.

What a time to be alive.

Cat person tokens.

This is a good compromise and I'm happy with it. Good to see the extremists on both sides crying really.

i never had any interest in playing a catgirl but now i do what have you done

you guys are making so many threads so fast that im not even able to get to shitpost in all of them