WelcomeWEFreedomWindsorEssexCounty-ActionCommunicationsRalliesResourcesSocialEventsWednesdayNightMeetings-ActivismAgoraAgorismCanadaCommonLawCommunityDataCentersDataCentresDoocracyFarmersMarketIntroductionsNaturalLawNewslettersOntarioOrganizingOutreachProjexProjexWikiRalliesResistanceAnalysisSoireesSoiréesWikiSpooksWindsorElectionsTop Subs
5
MatrixDev - - (+4|-0)
I decided to start lying in a way I feel mostly ok about but being honest about the lie will help a little more(self)
15 commentsbyx0x7

So these movie polls. I can get a lot of people to vote on them. But there is a consequence that I decided to count downvotes 2x because I want to find what everyone wants to watch (I'm a nerd who likes alternative election systems that find agreeable solutions). That means that the vote count on something can be large but it looks like only a trickle has even voted. This doesn't give off the party vibe I need movie nights to have.

So, tell me if I'm right here. Because the polls deceive people with the wrong impression I decided to counter this unintentional deception with.. even more deception. Now the score of the first item on the list is equal to the total number of upvotes and we adjust all other numbers equally.

I don't like the solution but doesn't this look better, than Spaceballs being 7 while 34 people have voted on it.

IDK. I'm very open to feedback. I'd rather have full and clear transparency without throwing a bajillion numbers at the user. Most sites solve this by having a simpler voting system. I'm unwilling to compromise on a better voting system that works with a larger number of items without the known negative results that more simple voting produces in that case. If we had a more simple voting system we'd be watching Fight Club every week.

This is what over simple democracy gives you. Shit a small collection of retards really likes. Do you see how over simple democracy has contributed to the enshitification of our world? It's worth keeping a better voting system if only to show improvements aren't that hard to make and it's worth being the example. Of course at least one person I know isn't to happy with the common results. The current system is a compromise between the retards and better opinions. Naive democracy just lets the retards dominate completely, even if they are a small group, if retards tend to have more similar opinions among themselves than do others. That's not a given but it's also not a given to not be the case. 50:50. And so a 50:50 prospect the system literally selects for retardation is a bad system. But worse, in the case of the most simple movie poll with many options where people can only upvote and select one option then it is a guarantee. The movie that is selected will be the one people have the strongest feelings about, and people have the strongest feelings about bad movies so a bad movie will be picked every time.

So yes, deviating from the most simple poll possible is worth it. But if only I knew how to convey the information cleanly at a glance without a table of numbers, including a general sense of how many people participated, and in a way that doesn't look lame.

Comment preview

[-]NiggerPete3(+3|0)

I love movie night

parentlinkreply
[-]soundsituation3(+3|0)

This means war.

parentlinkreply
[-]JasonCarswell3(+3|0)

All wars start with lies.

parentlinkreply
[-]Theodore_Kent3(+3|0)

This is what over simple democracy gives you. Shit a small collection of retards really likes.

Perhaps the poll shouldn't be a direct democracy than. Perhaps it should be more of a representative republic.

Have individual users pick a movie that they want to watch at the beginning of the week, and have them write a short blurb about why that movie deserves to be watched that particular week. Then have rest of the users vote on the basis of how persuasive or retarded their pitch was, and people can argue about in the comments.

I think this system would get users jazzed because they have a realistic chance of getting to watch their favorite movie, if their argument is good enough.

It would also drastically reduce the size of the list, which I think would be a plus, as it is simply too large, and there a quite a few good movies that seem permanently stuck at the bottom.

parentlinkreply
[-]x0x71(+1|0)

We could do that every now and again. It takes a little organization. One thing I like about the poll is it's easy to share, the link is always relevant, and if one week movies just aren't my top priority then I can just look at it at the end of the week and I know what we're watching.

But we could do a more high effort thing. I would say I'd need to depend on people participating but I guess if it doesn't get momentum I always have the poll to fall back on.

I do like to trim the poll slightly every now and again. At least the negatives. I could do that a little more aggressively. People suggested a lot of movies. I didn't want to gyp people and not actually include their thing. Maybe we should also start doing two from the poll when we use it that way we get through it faster.

What day of the week do you think we should start a movie debate thread? Saturday after? I guess I could make the thread before the movie starts so I can link people to it. Then Monday I can make a poll of only the suggestions from that thread. But the benefit is the voting comes with actual discussion preceding it.

There is nothing preventing discussion in the current poll thread btw. If we want discussion instead of voting we still need voting in the end to make a clear decision. So if discussion + voting. The only thing missing is discussion. I can't program or admin that into existence. That's kind of on you guys. I've got JC telling me he doesn't want voting and wants discussion and telling me to fix it. But like I did my half. If people don't have those discussions when I've made the threads for it I can't puppeteer people into doing what Jason wants. I control code not people.

parentlinkreply
[-]JasonCarswell1(+2|-1)

Have individual users pick a movie that they want to watch at the beginning of the week

There you go! I was just saying that. Great minds...

I think this system would get users jazzed because they have a realistic chance of getting to watch their favorite movie, if their argument is good enough.

One caveat though: They'd have to have the vote right before. Only the folks who show up to watch should have a say. Not to mention, an early pitch might get more votes than a later entry - which is fair only if you're the early bird. There's plenty of worms in the sea...

there a quite a few good movies that seem permanently stuck at the bottom.

parentlinkreply
[-]x0x71(+1|0)

Here's the problem with only people showing up voting. We have had a few low turnouts. If you restrict to only them, after attrition you are going to have 1 or 2 people voting.

If voting right before I'd need you guys to show up before show time for hang out time. Something I've kind of pushed for because it is fun to just watch clips and it does help reduce first timer attrition when they show up at movie time and the room isn't empty so it would help me grow the event.

Can we get a decent enough crowd to show up early to have a decent vote. Also when I market it it's helpful to know what the movie is.

parentlinkreply
[-]JasonCarswell1(+1|0)

How about a first pre-vote to try to narrow it down (as it exists), then (new) right before starting have the second final vote to lock it in? Whether it's the same results or not, they are the ones to actually watch it. Late folks and absentees had their chance. If the second and first vote don't match, the first can become the default second feature, unless circumstances evolve (ie. folks/viewers change their mind, sequels/series, a different second feature is preferred, etc.)

Should you choose to accept this impossible mission, when marketing this you should try to make this double-voting scheme clear.

parentlinkreply
[-]x0x71(+1|0)

I need to know what the movie is to market it and also torrent it. I'd prefer to torrent less so I don't want to torrent movies we aren't even going to watch.

We'll start a movie discussion thread in a second and then Monday'ish I'll turn it into a poll of only movies suggested. Each user only gets to make one movie suggestion to make sure they bring their best.

I still want to make use of the big poll so we'll alternate between that.

Actually can either you or Theo start that thread. I think either of you would be great to lead that discussion. Whichever of you manages to do it first.

@Theodore_Kent

parentlinkreply
[-]Theodore_Kent0(0|0)

I took a break from the internet to deal with an acute case of personal retardation.

I am back now, and I like this idea.

parentlinkreply
[-]x0x72(+2|0)

Math time.

If a matrix represents people opinions, the direction, and relative strength where rows correspond to people and columns correspond with options. And the operations rowMax replaces in every row the value that is most positive with 1 and all other values with zero. And colSum sums all the the columns into one aggregate row. After the operation rowMax(colSum(rowMax(Mat))), if the values in the matrix follow most reasonable distributions, then then the column containing 1 after after this operations will be the same as the column with the greatest magnitude almost every time. That doesn't mean it's the best option. In fact it pretty much it means it's the worst option if negative values in this matrix correspond with real negative outcomes.. like watching a shitty movie or having politicians that completely fuck you over.

This is why most democracy is fucking retarded. But to the people who think intelligence is knowing what answers are acceptable and correct, instead of real thought, know that democracy = good is the answer that is acceptable and correct. So of course they are smarter than anyone who says otherwise. They know what answers are acceptable and correct while others don't. Clearly the others lack an education.

parentlinkreply
[-]JasonCarswell1(+1|0)

So let's have discussions about "what are good survey questions?" or "what kind/type of questions should we even be asking?" to improve the surveys/democracy.

How/who decides?

Who decides the deciders?

Who watches the watchers.

parentlinkreply
[-]JasonCarswell1(+1|0)

Voting is lazy.

Naïve democracy just lets the retards dominate completely

In a perfect world: I want people to bring suggestions and discuss to find a consensus on the best option instead of wasting time seeing something for the umpteenth time and/or watching something that may once have had a smidge of social-historical-memetic relevance. Respect our time - and put a little time in (in discussions) before you take a little time out (watching). Time that we'll never get back - or time well spent?

To start: I don't even know who I'm watching with, what their preferences are, or what would be best to recommend to them. I've made lots of outreach efforts on many fronts, including a few great Irish movies for St Patrick's Day that were ignored. To be honest, I don't know if this is an audience worth working for - because I don't know the audience.

Transparency.

If you're going to "rig the vote", then lay out the why, the rules, and the results - in short, show the logic and the algo. If we don't know how our votes are weighted then we're just malleable suckers, whereas if we know the real score then we're autonomous actors in the agora.

Alternatives.

There are other ways to have a movie night. For example: Sign up, make a list, each person picks a movie. Then, for better or worse, folks will be exposed to the Good, Bad, and Ugly. Someone will show something emo, someone else will show something smutty, someone else will be art-house, someone will feature banal pop crap, someone will lust over their fave actress, etc. I can appreciate soooooooo many genres - but I don't even know what other folks like, besides the pop-crap I've already seen to death.

Yes, I may be older than others, and I've been a professional content creator (and/or lazy fuck) so I've been more keen on cinema than most, but I still need to branch out rather than rehash the same old stuff that might be new to some. Old farts are people too and if we can't grow too then there's not much point being here.

Another idea:

I'm not sure how, but compel people to state their case for this or that movie. They will draft up a good reason to watch it - or rewatch it. Then we can vote on these.

Yet another idea:

Now it get's complex: Make people read a write-up (above) and vote on it. A MetaVote™ might include a scale of 0-10 of want-to-see, along with other options like TL;DR and/or "unseen", "unfinished", "viewed", etc. Take in a lot of information. There does NOT need to be a "winner". However, the grandmaster x0x7 could make a decision, with or without discussion, based on the open results of nebulous data and whom ever may be in attendance. The ultimate goal is to have a good time. No one refutes that, though finding it may be elusive. More data and participation can only help in the pursuit.

Enshitification.

Good word. I need to use it more.

parentlinkreply
[-]x0x70(0|0)

Here is the problem with saying voting is lazy. People are lazy. If I try to get anyone else to contribute to even the smallest part of getting these movie nights together it always falls through. I have a habit of trying to get the people who are the most critical to contribute just to see if they are willing to do 2% of what they ask for. And it always fails.

And this is fine. People are lazy. But that means that for any system to work it needs to work around lazy people. So if you tell me voting is lazy I only hear that it is a very good system. The more complicated you make it not only is it unlikely that people will play along and jump through increasing hoops to participate, but the chance is high that you are deviating from their ideal increases in complexity. I can implement one person's complicated suggestion because they feel alienated by a simple solution, but then I alienate further people who want different complicated solutions. The proportion I'll consider a complicated suggestion relates directly with the amount someone will help out with running simple parts of a simple whole. Because if I make it complicated and I can't rely on others to help when I'm not available then it isn't a good system.

parentlinkreply