Totallympics International Song Contest Discussion

[dcro 10,179]

17 minutes ago, OlympicIRL said:

If more than one user chooses the same nation, what happens? Do we just allow each of those entries to compete? If not then how do we decide who gets the right to represent that nation?

 

This one can be resolved with "First come, first serve" principle. Whoever selects the desired country first (via PM to the organizer), gets it. Basically we just continue using the standard practice seen at the Festival of Music.

 

18 minutes ago, OlympicIRL said:

At what point is it revealed who represented each nation? Probably at the end of the contest would be the best.

 

I agree the end of the contest would be the best option.

 

18 minutes ago, OlympicIRL said:

At what point do we reveal who judged the various matches? Again most likely at the end of the contest.

 

Actually, I think the juries should be listed upfront, together with the schedule of matches. Only their votes for the specific matches could be kept secret until the end.

 

Something like this:

Rwanda	6	3	Burundi
Judge 1, Judge 2, Judge 3, Judge 4, Judge 5, Judge 6, Judge 7, Judge 8, Judge 9

 

21 minutes ago, OlympicIRL said:

I think at the beginning, when all the entries are submitted, each users ranks the songs in secret and based on those rankings is how we decide how each user judged a match.

 

Also this ranking at the start can be used to make seeds for the groups. Everything will be kept private and participants won't know who is seeded until it is all concluded.

 

Having to wait for a complete ranking from each user could be quite time-consuming, so it would probably prolong the competition quite a bit. I'd rather have the jury panels listed for each match, and then users being asked to judge their specific matches in a certain time frame.

 

However, if we do end up using a ranking for each user, I'd still prefer to have those rankings scratched after the group stage and everything after that resolved according to users' preferences during the knock-out stages themselves. It would allow users to change their minds during late stages, which would be something new for TISC.

[OlympicIRL 4,769]

 

5 minutes ago, dcro said:

 

This one can be resolved with "First come, first serve" principle. Whoever selects the desired country first (via PM to the organizer), gets it. Basically we just continue using the standard practice seen at the Festival of Music.

 

 

I agree the end of the contest would be the best option.

 

 

Actually, I think the juries should be listed upfront, together with the schedule of matches. Only their votes for the specific matches could be kept secret until the end.

 

Something like this:

Rwanda	6	3	Burundi
Judge 1, Judge 2, Judge 3, Judge 4, Judge 5, Judge 6, Judge 7, Judge 8, Judge 9

 

 

Having to wait for a complete ranking from each user could be quite time-consuming, so it would probably prolong the competition quite a bit. I'd rather have the jury panels listed for each match, and then users being asked to judge their specific matches in a certain time frame.

 

However, if we do end up using a ranking for each user, I'd still prefer to have those rankings scratched after the group stage and everything after that resolved according to users' preferences during the knock-out stages themselves. It would allow users to change their minds during late stages, which would be something new for TISC.

 

 

I think expecting people to come and vote multiple times within a specific time frame would be a disaster tbh plus it would mean extra stress for the host to make sure they are present every day.

 

Also listing the judges would mean there is no longer secrecy about who chose which songs. If you see 9 judges listed for a match, you know those 9 users did not enter that song.

 

[dcro 10,179]

20 minutes ago, OlympicIRL said:

 

 

 

I think expecting people to come and vote multiple times within a specific time frame would be a disaster tbh plus it would mean extra stress for the host to make sure they are present every day.

 

Also listing the judges would mean there is no longer secrecy about who chose which songs. If you see 9 judges listed for a match, you know those 9 users did not enter that song.

 

 

Well, users can provide all their group stage decisions in bulk. Either way, they will be asked to send something, and sending their preferences regarding 10-15 head-to-head matches seems easier than sending complete rankings.

 

But I do see how displaying the jury panels could ruin secrecy. So perhaps there is another way that users can be informed about the matches they should resolve (for example via PM)?

 

Knock out stages, which I'm guessing will be open for everyone to vote?, can be done using the prediction contest formula, meaning users are asked to gradually fill out templates for Round of 16, Quarterfinals, Semifinals and Finals.

 

In any case, I'm not sure how much fun factor there would be in a competition format where users are seemingly asked to judge head-to-head matches... Only to have everything resolved before they even know who is facing who.

[OlympicIRL 4,769]

18 minutes ago, dcro said:

 

Well, users can provide all their group stage decisions in bulk. Either way, they will be asked to send something, and sending their preferences regarding 10-15 head-to-head matches seems easier than sending complete rankings.

 

But I do see how displaying the jury panels could ruin secrecy. So perhaps there is another way that users can be informed about the matches they should resolve (for example via PM)?

 

Knock out stages, which I'm guessing will be open for everyone to vote?, can be done using the prediction contest formula, meaning users are asked to gradually fill out templates for Round of 16, Quarterfinals, Semifinals and Finals.

 

In any case, I'm not sure how much fun factor there would be in a competition format where users are seemingly asked to judge head-to-head matches... Only to have everything resolved before they even know who is facing who.

 

 

Well in normal TISC everything is resolved before the Grand Final and it's still exciting since no one knows the end result until it happens.

 

But it's fair enough. I am just thinking about the logistics of hosting something over multiple days and also trying to gather results each day. Plus I think it's fairer to have the judges vote in advance of the entire tournament for the simple reason that I think people like an underdog. If it looks like a song is a big favourite and has won all their matches 8-0 or something, then people tend to get a bit bored of that and so will choose differently.

[Werloc 3,127]

2 hours ago, OlympicIRL said:

 

 

Well in normal TISC everything is resolved before the Grand Final and it's still exciting since no one knows the end result until it happens.

 

But it's fair enough. I am just thinking about the logistics of hosting something over multiple days and also trying to gather results each day. Plus I think it's fairer to have the judges vote in advance of the entire tournament for the simple reason that I think people like an underdog. If it looks like a song is a big favourite and has won all their matches 8-0 or something, then people tend to get a bit bored of that and so will choose differently.

 

Seeing as different judges are going to be appointed to judge different matches, it is definitely not certain that that 8-0 means that the other 30+ members share the same sentiment.

 

Another thing, this is Totallympics, I'm not expecting an 8-0 on any single match even if someone sends a 60 second clip of an Austrian mountain goat yodelling. 

 

If people are going to change their votes in favour of an underdog story rather than what they believe to be a better song, then that is mostly a problem of the person and not the system.

 

Lastly, to make it a bit easier on the host and participants, the users could provide a ranking for the group stage, ranking 1-8 the entrants of group A, B, C and D. I think that four separate smaller rankings would be a lot easier and more reasonable than comitting to a 1-32 ranking

 

It also wouldn't give away everything to the host as well until the quarterfinal round starts.

[OlympicIRL 4,769]

1 hour ago, Werloc said:

 

Seeing as different judges are going to be appointed to judge different matches, it is definitely not certain that that 8-0 means that the other 30+ members share the same sentiment.

 

Another thing, this is Totallympics, I'm not expecting an 8-0 on any single match even if someone sends a 60 second clip of an Austrian mountain goat yodelling. 

 

If people are going to change their votes in favour of an underdog story rather than what they believe to be a better song, then that is mostly a problem of the person and not the system.

 

Lastly, to make it a bit easier on the host and participants, the users could provide a ranking for the group stage, ranking 1-8 the entrants of group A, B, C and D. I think that four separate smaller rankings would be a lot easier and more reasonable than comitting to a 1-32 ranking

 

It also wouldn't give away everything to the host as well until the quarterfinal round starts.

 

 

Yeah fair enough, I guess pre-ranking all the songs is a lot of effort and probably not the ideal way of deciding outcomes. I will leave it up to you all to decide on the format.

[Vektor 3,195]

So we should decide the format of this Festival of Music TISC competition in the next few weeks, right? I mean, we are 7 weeks away from date of the postponed opening ceremony (and 9 weeks away from the closing ceremony), and we will need time for the selection. 

[OlympicIRL 4,769]

2 hours ago, Vektor said:

So we should decide the format of this Festival of Music TISC competition in the next few weeks, right? I mean, we are 7 weeks away from date of the postponed opening ceremony (and 9 weeks away from the closing ceremony), and we will need time for the selection. 

Yes this will need to be decided soon and we haven’t received many suggestions in the meantime.

 

I think the Totallympics Games are cancelled now. So is it still wise for us to pursue a multi-day format? How do we maximise the amount of interest in the contest? Having one single day for a live show? Or if it is just split into groups and revealing results of matches each day, is that also interesting enough? I am happy to do either but I will need to know for sure by next week.

And also if it’s split over multiple days, there might be problem with organising it as I may not be available every one of those days since I am on holiday for those 2 weeks and will probably spend some time going on local trips (depending on virus situation of course).

[OlympicIRL 4,769]

I will come up with a plan for the format by this weekend and post it here for you all to comment. I will probably decide to go for the groups and knockout system with 1 v 1 matches like we discussed and with random jury members voting in each match. Also participants’ song choices will remain hidden.

 

I don’t think it’s going to be anything spectacular since it will just be revealing day to day who won the various matches but it’s something unique from TISC which is good. And since we have milestone TISC #15 coming up soon then I think it will be ok for this special event to be more low-key and different in style.

[Vektor 3,195]

Yeah, I think we should do the group stage + KO rounds format. We will have to figure out how to select jury members for the matches in a fair way (for example, one jury member should only vote for one match per group). I also think that everyone should vote in every round, which means that every jury member should be eligible to vote in the final match, instead of just having a randomly selected jury for the final as well.