PDA

View Full Version : Official "Metal only?" year end poll?


JRA
12-10-2008, 09:36 PM
So yea, pick one.

Maiden33
12-10-2008, 09:39 PM
The inclusion of a 3rd option makes me wary of how many people will actually vote correctly, however this is still a good idea.

JRA
12-10-2008, 09:41 PM
The inclusion of a 3rd option makes me wary of how many people will actually vote correctly, however this is still a good idea.

#3 is the most correct vote of them all. :D

es156
12-10-2008, 09:45 PM
You forgot one option:

Blaze Is The Messiah! :mad:

SirLardsAlot
12-10-2008, 09:47 PM
You forgot one option:

Blaze Is The Messiah! :mad:

:blaze: :blaze: :blaze: :blaze: :blaze: :blaze: :blaze: :blaze: :blaze: :blaze: :blaze: :blaze: :blaze:

JRA
12-10-2008, 09:47 PM
You forgot one option:

Blaze Is The Messiah! :mad:

The only person who would care about that is loooooooooooooooong gone. :( :bouville:

Maiden33
12-10-2008, 09:49 PM
You forgot one option:

Blaze Is The Messiah! :mad:

Sadly he was certainly not this year. His new album was pretty dissapointing, bordering on flat-out boring.

es156
12-10-2008, 09:50 PM
The only person who would care about that is loooooooooooooooong gone. :( :bouville:

Not true. I know of at least 3 citizens of MetaSetLists that still keep the faith.

es156
12-10-2008, 09:51 PM
Sadly he was certainly not this year. His new album was pretty dissapointing, bordering on flat-out boring.

Heresy!


:mad:


:bouville:

zgodt
12-10-2008, 10:05 PM
If you go all metal, then who decides what is or isn't "metal"?

Sinfulsot
12-10-2008, 10:15 PM
If you go all metal, then who decides what is or isn't "metal"?

Agreed. i had to go with "mai diversity" because you never know what's going to turn you on, metal or not.

plus, part of the whole genre is the spirited debate on what is or is not metal.

AND, i have seen on more than one occasion, members of this forum talk about the non-metal music they have been listening to. perhaps not at great length, but it was still put out there.

powerslave_85
12-11-2008, 08:08 AM
Even in the beginning, the year-end list wasn't necessarily meant to be a metal-only thing. Only recently have people been getting their panties in a knot because a couple of non-metal albums made it into the top 10. Someone call the Waaaaaahhh-mbulance. If you get that upset over something as ridiculous as this, you need help. Besides, I'm pretty sure the whole fiasco of last year was an abberation. The truth is, this place is so small that the list is going to be made up of 2 or 3 albums that most everyone agreed on (Amon Amarth and Opeth will probably be it this year), and then a bunch of stuff that only a couple of people had, but they both ranked it high, so it got a lot of points. It would stand to reason, then, that Tegan & Sara making last year's top 5 had more to do with our ranking system than two or three of us being a bunch of metal-hating elitists.

BTW, I think it's pretty ridiculous for anyone to say that me, Brad, or anyone else here doesn't like metal. If we didn't, we wouldn't be here. Period. My lists in the past have had plenty of metal, I just thought 2008 was a bit of an off year. I'm sure as hell not going to go out and listen to stuff like Nostradamus just to pad out my list.

/rant

SomewhereInTime72
12-11-2008, 08:33 AM
This is a metal site, and we're all metalheads here. If a non-metal album happens to place, it's still an album enjoyed by metalheads, so wouldn't it still deserve mention?

mankvill
12-11-2008, 11:29 AM
I know that the one non-metal album on my list (Ben Folds) won't make the finals. But to see if lots of members of this board really liked a certain non-metal album and it made the year-end list, it'd be interesting because then, I'd probably want to check it out. It's a good way to expand my taste! :D

Spiral_Slave
12-11-2008, 11:36 AM
As a resident of a few years on here, I have absolutely nothing to say about this.

Firewind
12-11-2008, 11:46 AM
Sadly he was certainly not this year. His new album was pretty dissapointing, bordering on flat-out boring.

Ooh Reginald... I disagree!

overkiller
12-11-2008, 11:53 AM
If you go all metal, then who decides what is or isn't "metal"?

Right. It wouldn't work. Are we going to call the new Agalloch "metal"? What about the new Earth? One would be unlikely to deny either of those bands status as "metal", but you'd be hard-pressed to say the same of their new releases.

Firewind
12-11-2008, 11:54 AM
Right. It wouldn't work. Are we going to call the new Agalloch "metal"? What about the new Earth? One would be unlikely to deny either of those bands status as "metal", but you'd be hard-pressed to say the same of their new releases.

Definitely. I don't think it would be constructive to get into a system like Metal Archives, it just makes things unnecessarily hard.

Div
12-11-2008, 12:55 PM
i dont think anyone would have a problem if the occasional non-metal album was included. but when half of someones list or more is non metal albums and they end up on the final results it just gets irritating. it gets to the point where people try look cool by seeing how many non metal albums they can post.

powerslave_85
12-11-2008, 01:01 PM
It's quite a chore for me to go to the record store. I often spend hours there, thinking "God, what's going to make me seem the most cool to a bunch of anonymous teenagers on the internet?"

ChildrenofSodom
12-11-2008, 02:24 PM
i dont think anyone would have a problem if the occasional non-metal album was included. but when half of someones list or more is non metal albums and they end up on the final results it just gets irritating. it gets to the point where people try look cool by seeing how many non metal albums they can post.

I disagree.

DethMaiden
12-11-2008, 02:34 PM
In reference to those who questioned how to define metal: ex-fucking-actly. Eight of my albums were reviewed by Decibel, a metal magazine, but only four appear on Metal-Archives. Is it going to be tr00 metal only, too?

Again, fuck that mindset. And Dylan made an excellent point about a non-metal album being respected by a large number of metalheads being worth noting.

ChildrenofSodom
12-11-2008, 03:13 PM
If Children of Bodom's Blooddrunk can make it on a top ten list of music (I dont care what type), but Nas' Untitled can't, then I quit music.

Div
12-11-2008, 03:17 PM
you guys are winning the vote anyway so i dont see why everyones getting all defensive

Firewind
12-11-2008, 03:24 PM
If Children of Bodom's Blooddrunk can make it on a top ten list of music (I dont care what type), but Nas' Untitled can't, then I quit music.

Haha, seriously...

mankvill
12-11-2008, 03:27 PM
SERIOUS SHIT

TonyD
12-11-2008, 03:29 PM
It's quite a chore for me to go to the record store. I often spend hours there, thinking "God, what's going to make me seem the most cool to a bunch of anonymous teenagers on the internet?"

lul

If Children of Bodom's Blooddrunk can make it on a top ten list of music (I dont care what type), but Nas' Untitled can't, then I quit music.

If Blooddrunk is on there regardless of who else makes it on, I'll have to disown this site.

ChildrenofSodom
12-11-2008, 03:48 PM
you guys are winning the vote anyway so i dont see why everyones getting all defensive

You're right. People should never fight back.

Div
12-11-2008, 04:04 PM
.................................................. .................................................. ....................

JRA
12-11-2008, 04:22 PM
Blooddrunk isn't that bad is it? :eyes:

Perhaps I should be more clear as to what "Saragate" meant: People conspiring to make an album they like outside the norm break into a poll just to be trolls.

And Nick, let's be honest. You, Brady, and Scott did that just to see if it would make the top 10, or at the very least you did. i.e. Trolling. That shit is, the way I see it, what annoyed this site. Not because they weren't metal. Hell Rush's credibility is questionable, yet the people who vote for them voted because they cared, not just to see if they could wedding crash a top 10 list by a supposed bunch of l33t metal heads.

:2cents:


Addednum: mad Wu-Props to the one other guy that voted for me. :money:

DethMaiden
12-11-2008, 05:09 PM
Blooddrunk isn't that bad is it? :eyes:

Perhaps I should be more clear as to what "Saragate" meant: People conspiring to make an album they like outside the norm break into a poll just to be trolls.

And Nick, let's be honest. You, Brady, and Scott did that just to see if it would make the top 10, or at the very least you did. i.e. Trolling. That shit is, the way I see it, what annoyed this site. Not because they weren't metal. Hell Rush's credibility is questionable, yet the people who vote for them voted because they cared, not just to see if they could wedding crash a top 10 list by a supposed bunch of l33t metal heads.

:2cents:


Addednum: mad Wu-Props to the one other guy that voted for me. :money:

If I could go back in time and hear The Con before 2007 let out, it would be in my top 5 for sure.

powerslave_85
12-11-2008, 05:24 PM
And Nick, let's be honest. You, Brady, and Scott did that just to see if it would make the top 10, or at the very least you did. i.e. Trolling.Umm...no, we didn't. I loved the album and gave it a high ranking. A couple of other people saw how much I liked it/talked about it and decided to check out. They enjoyed it and gave it a high ranking as well. I know some of you guys love conspiracy theories, but I can assure you I did not have any ulterior motives. Hell, I didn't even know that Brady and Scott ranked it so high until they posted their lists. Now, that doesn't mean I wasn't incredibly amused when it made the top 5, but I sure as hell didn't plan it ahead of time. I have better things to do than try to upset the balance of message board polls.

Spiral_Slave
12-11-2008, 07:30 PM
Blooddrunk isn't that bad is it? :eyes:

No, I really don't understand all this shit talking. You may not like it, but it is NOT the album that all other bad albums should be measured against.

ChildrenofSodom
12-11-2008, 08:08 PM
No, I really don't understand all this shit talking. You may not like it, but it is NOT the album that all other bad albums should be measured against.

You're right. Just albums in 2008.

That or Winds of Plague.

SomewhereInTime72
12-11-2008, 08:35 PM
Cryptopsy is the ultimate 2008 disappointment.

mankvill
12-11-2008, 10:26 PM
Cryptopsy is the ultimate disappointment.

Fixed your post there buddy

overkiller
12-11-2008, 10:57 PM
And Nick, let's be honest. You, Brady, and Scott did that just to see if it would make the top 10, or at the very least you did. i.e. Trolling.


No.

overkiller
12-11-2008, 11:01 PM
And honestly, guys, I think Scott's objection about defining metal ends the debate. Think about it.

Maiden33
12-11-2008, 11:07 PM
You people fail to realize something.

Going all-metal wouldn't create a problem of deciding whether or not stuff was metal as long as everyone was aware of the rules. If you use peronal discression based on logic to decide what to you is or isn't metal, it's all fine.
The purpose of the decision isn't to be black and white on metal vs. non-metal, it's too ensure we don't encounter anohter fiasco like we had last year where people seem to be purposely going out of their way to be diverse for the sake of diverse, altering lists, and martyring themselves for being "cool and unique" for being cool enough to listen to stuff that isn't metal.

Maiden33
12-11-2008, 11:07 PM
And honestly, guys, I think Scott's objection about defining metal ends the debate. Think about it.

No it doesn't, read what I just posted.

overkiller
12-11-2008, 11:10 PM
it's too ensure we don't encounter anohter fiasco like we had last year where people seem to be purposely going out of their way to be diverse for the sake of diverse, altering lists, and martyring themselves for being "cool and unique" for being cool enough to listen to stuff that isn't metal.

I'm seriously in awe that people actually believe this.

Is this whole hissy fit really over Tegan and Sara making it onto the boards' top 10? Or did I miss something?

Maiden33
12-11-2008, 11:13 PM
I'm seriously in awe that people actually believe this.

Is this whole hissy fit really over Tegan and Sara making it onto the boards' top 10? Or did I miss something?

I have been fighting this fight long before the votes came in for 2007. I have been fighting this fight since before voting even started. I don't like the fact that certain people here seem less concerned with enjoying music and more concerned with makng idols of themselves for being different and "More Diverse Than Person B", and flaming those who aren't "enlightened" enough and are "close-minded metal fans". This is a fucking Metal forum, as designated by it's title. You are free to discuss all the non-metal here you want, but I couldn't back this possibility more.

overkiller
12-11-2008, 11:18 PM
I don't like the fact that certain people here seem less concerned with enjoying music and more concerned with makng idols of themselves for being different and "More Diverse Than Person B", and flaming those who aren't "enlightened" enough and are "close-minded metal fans".

I'm not even sure what to say to this. That's just so utterly ridiculous, and, as far as I can tell, untrue. I'm concerned about enjoying music and ranking my 10 favorite albums that come out in a year, an activity I get a lot of enjoyment out of, and it just so happens that I choose to discuss this on a forum based around metal. I'm not trying to make myself out to be an idol of diversity or some other such nonsense, and as far as I know no one else here is either.

overkiller
12-11-2008, 11:31 PM
And I still don't really understand why people seem to think this necessary. What harm does it do you if an album you don't like makes it onto the boards' top 10? I've been seeing total crap make the cut since I came here, but as long as it's "metal" everybody's hunky-dory. I think it's interesting that within a small group of metal fans something like an indie pop record can catch on enough to place in the top 10.

Why don't we just make a "metal only" category and make everybody happy? True, we'd have to come up with some dumbfuck arbitrary rule set for determining what qualifies, but so what? Everybody could make two lists and wave their e-dicks twice as much.

Maiden33
12-11-2008, 11:49 PM
And I still don't really understand why people seem to think this necessary. What harm does it do you if an album you don't like makes it onto the boards' top 10? I've been seeing total crap make the cut since I came here.
Me too. I'm not trying to tweak the results so I like them, there's not a chance in hell.


but as long as it's "metal" everybody's hunky-dory. I think it's interesting that within a small group of metal fans something like an indie pop record can catch on enough to place in the top 10.
It didn't really "catch on" last year. 3 people voted for it. We've had 15 people vote for albums last year that didn't place in the top 10.


Why don't we just make a "metal only" category and make everybody happy? True, we'd have to come up with some dumbfuck arbitrary rule set for determining what qualifies, but so what? Everybody could make two lists and wave their e-dicks twice as much.

You clearly never bothered to comprehend what I posted when I said, there need not be any arbitrary rules as long as people use personal discretion and common sense. It's not about having a black-and-white cut off. I can garuntee you nothng "un-metal" enough to cause a shitstorm would make it through the cracks if people used said discretion.

This is kind of a losing battle for either side, and no one's going to go home happy. I realize I'm not exactly coming from the right place here, but I don't think totally wrong either.

SomewhereInTime72
12-12-2008, 12:55 AM
I don't see why any one person on this board should ever be happy with the top ten. Everyone has their own top ten, and it will never match the whole sites. The whole point of this thing is to see a general representation of the posters on this board's favorite albums. It's lame to try to sway the results by altering your list to give a certain album more points or whatever, but I would think the vast majority of us are cool enough not to do that. I think that regardless of metal-ness, a good album is a good album. I've always felt that this list was never about metal - it was never even really that much about music - it was just about the community we have here and just showing us things in an interesting light. :hippie:

This whole thing can go down the same way it usually does, and peacefully too. As long as those of us on the "diverse" side (my list is still mostly metal, but I guess this probably includes me) aren't elitist dicks to those who aren't, and those on the "metal" side don't have a stroke if a non-metal album is popular. :2cents:

I hope this post makes sense tomorrow! :lol:

ChildrenofSodom
12-12-2008, 04:17 AM
The top ten polls are not sponsored by Pavo, therefore, there is no obligation to follow the 'metal rules' of this site.

DethMaiden
12-12-2008, 04:22 AM
I can't even justify the arguments for a metal-only poll; they're so fucking ridiculous.

ravenheart
12-12-2008, 05:39 AM
This doesn't really matter to me. I hear enough good music in a year to compile a comprehensive list, metal and non-metal, and if I need to produce a metal-only list, I just start at #1 and remove non-metal releases until I've got 10 metal ones at the top. Job done.

DethMaiden
12-12-2008, 06:02 AM
I don't see why any one person on this board should ever be happy with the top ten. Everyone has their own top ten, and it will never match the whole sites. The whole point of this thing is to see a general representation of the posters on this board's favorite albums. It's lame to try to sway the results by altering your list to give a certain album more points or whatever, but I would think the vast majority of us are cool enough not to do that. I think that regardless of metal-ness, a good album is a good album. I've always felt that this list was never about metal - it was never even really that much about music - it was just about the community we have here and just showing us things in an interesting light. :hippie:

This whole thing can go down the same way it usually does, and peacefully too. As long as those of us on the "diverse" side (my list is still mostly metal, but I guess this probably includes me) aren't elitist dicks to those who aren't, and those on the "metal" side don't have a stroke if a non-metal album is popular. :2cents:

I hope this post makes sense tomorrow! :lol:

It makes sense and is chock-full of fucking excellent points. Like I said, my list is probably 8/10 "metal" (well, if post-rock is sorta metal anyway), and I'm going to be crucified because Fleet Foxes and Lemuria impressed me way more than most metal I heard this year.

Maiden33
12-12-2008, 06:33 AM
It makes sense and is chock-full of fucking excellent points. Like I said, my list is probably 8/10 "metal" (well, if post-rock is sorta metal anyway), and I'm going to be crucified because Fleet Foxes and Lemuria impressed me way more than most metal I heard this year.

GET THE NAILS.

Spiral_Slave
12-12-2008, 07:50 AM
You're right. Just albums in 2008.

That or Winds of Plague.

:tp: Ok.

Fe Maiden
12-12-2008, 10:19 AM
Sadly he was certainly not this year. His new album was pretty dissapointing, bordering on flat-out boring.People seem to love it on the Maiden boards:confused:

Div
12-12-2008, 01:51 PM
Maiden33 pointed out the real problem, which is the fucked up scoring system. We need to get rid of the "10 points for first place, 9 points for second... etc." because it allows a small handful of people to totally skew the results. The current system doesn't provide a way for people to determine what the most widely liked album was in the forum community. It's based too much on a few personal opinions and less on what the forum can agree on as the best album. (ex. Underoath almost made it to the top 10 in 2006 even though nobody here listens to, or likes them) Think about it, when you vote for office does voter A get to vote 10 times because hes more fanatical about the canidate than voter B, who only gets to vote once? No, they both get one, equal vote. But we still have about a month to come up with a new way.


I'll add a suggestion from the top of my head to get the ball rolling. I think everyone should submit a list of up to 10 albums that they liked the most for the given year (everyone gets to vote on an album ONCE, not 10 times, not 9 times... all albums you submit on the list are given equal rank) After that someone will tally up the votes and the 10 most popular albums will get posted into a poll on a seperate thread. People will then vote (once) in that poll for the album they liked the best. A tie-breaking system can be added incase of a tie.


this system will adress the following issues:

- people who havent heard a full 10 albums that they enjoyed will no longer be required to vote for the ones they didnt care for just to flesh out a list of 10 in order for their other votes to recieve maximum value.

- it prevents people from point-whoring their albums to the top of the list and shoving it in everyones faces. it also prevents people from re-arranging their order to mess with the results.

- if only 3 people voted for "insert album that you liked here" than too fucking bad, it doesnt get on the list, no matter how much you really really liked it and totally thought it was a masterpiece and deserved to be on there and think that everyone elses opinions are stupid and wrong and yours are more important than theirs.

- if not enough people have heard of your album then you didn't do a good enough job getting the word out. write some interesting album reviews. this is an added bonus because it encourages increased literacy and more activity on the forum.

- it also encourages people to discuss their music and not keep it a secret until the end of the year just so they look all cool and diverse by posting albums noone else has ever heard of.


(sorry about that last sentence but you guys are fun to troll)

powerslave_85
12-12-2008, 02:20 PM
I don't mean to toot my own horn here, but I'm pretty sure I was the one who said the problem was with the scoring system.

- it also encourages people to discuss their music and not keep it a secret until the end of the year just so they look all cool and diverse by posting albums noone else has ever heard of.Which is a nice idea, but if, say, Brady started threads about No Age or Vampire Weekend, it would mostly likely be met with chirping crickets. And that doesn't just happen with non-metal stuff; I'm sure Maiden33* has refrained from discussing a lot of his favorite albums for the same reason.

*Speaking of which, in some ways I'm surprised that he has such a huge problem with people like Brad and I. His musical tastes are just as reviled as some of mine, if not more so. If anything, he should be able to sympathize.

SomewhereInTime72
12-12-2008, 04:33 PM
If every album gets the same no matter where they're ranked, Nostradums will probably win.

...Just thought I'd point that out. :tongue:

Maiden33
12-12-2008, 04:55 PM
If every album gets the same no matter where they're ranked, Nostradums will probably win.

...Just thought I'd point that out. :tongue:

Yeah it will. I can be sure of that. That's the problem with the all-one-point ranking system, but I am against the old scoring. This is quite a pickle we're in.

SomewhereInTime72
12-12-2008, 04:59 PM
- it prevents people from point-whoring their albums to the top of the list and shoving it in everyones faces. it also prevents people from re-arranging their order to mess with the results.

As long as no one does this, I fail to see the problem with the old system.

Maiden33
12-12-2008, 05:01 PM
As long as no one does this, I fail to see the problem with the old system.

This is true, the problem is that we can't be sure that's not going to happen, and we kind of have to set an arbitrary set of rules prior to opening the polls. If we say one thing and then change the rules to fit our liking, we'll be pulling a repeat of what Brad did in the 2007 voting.

TonyD
12-12-2008, 05:47 PM
I have been fighting this fight long before the votes came in for 2007. I have been fighting this fight since before voting even started. I don't like the fact that certain people here seem less concerned with enjoying music and more concerned with makng idols of themselves for being different and "More Diverse Than Person B", and flaming those who aren't "enlightened" enough and are "close-minded metal fans". This is a fucking Metal forum, as designated by it's title. You are free to discuss all the non-metal here you want, but I couldn't back this possibility more.

There we go.

DethMaiden
12-12-2008, 06:27 PM
So if we fix the scoring system and leave the non-metal, what do Uds. propose we do?

ChildrenofSodom
12-12-2008, 07:33 PM
So...my number ten is perfectly equal to your number one?

I dont think so.

By giving one point for each vote, you wouldnt be able to do a top ten. You would have to do a #1 vote. Which is lame, and doesnt display our diversity.

TonyD
12-12-2008, 08:19 PM
Would it work better if it was just a top ten instead of having them numbered from 1 to 10

powerslave_85
12-12-2008, 08:46 PM
Would it work better if it was just a top ten instead of having them numbered from 1 to 10
That could work.

ChildrenofSodom
12-12-2008, 08:52 PM
Would it work better if it was just a top ten instead of having them numbered from 1 to 10

The only problem I foresee is that, say, Nostradamus, is 10 on everyones list, having a non-numbered list of favorites will make is see that that album was held as highly as others. So, I can foresee an album that may be #10 for everyone being selected as the best album of 2008, based soley on those unweighted votes.

I think the argument that the weights are bad because three hipsters can pick a lame indie album and beat everyone else is a weak one. If metal really was as great you guys think, then in that particular year there should have been a metal album that just blew everything else out of the water, and you metalheads could reach a consensus on making it number one. Thus far, I dont think any album has been good enough for enough people to put it at #1 and deem it the best metal album of 2008. Its the inconsistency of the vast metal genre that allows shitty albums like The Con win. Thats your own faults.

Div
12-12-2008, 09:38 PM
The only problem I foresee is that, say, Nostradamus, is 10 on everyones list, having a non-numbered list of favorites will make is see that that album was held as highly as others. So, I can foresee an album that may be #10 for everyone being selected as the best album of 2008, based soley on those unweighted votes.

I think the argument that the weights are bad because three hipsters can pick a lame indie album and beat everyone else is a weak one. If metal really was as great you guys think, then in that particular year there should have been a metal album that just blew everything else out of the water, and you metalheads could reach a consensus on making it number one. Thus far, I dont think any album has been good enough for enough people to put it at #1 and deem it the best metal album of 2008. Its the inconsistency of the vast metal genre that allows shitty albums like The Con win. Thats your own faults.


That wouldn't be a problem because you don't have to vote for 10 albums, you can vote for UP TO ten albums. If you didn't think nostradamus was worthy of going on the list, then you dont have to include it. You would only include albums that you think are hits of the year.

SomewhereInTime72
12-13-2008, 12:42 AM
Hm, I like the old scoring system. But if you want to vote for, say, only five albums, I'd say let them count for the full points that anyone else's top five counts. It's only fair not to force people to fluff out their list.

DethMaiden
12-13-2008, 04:22 AM
I'm also getting pissed that the standard for our failed system that no one ever bitched about is the fact that The Con made last year's top ten (it would have been higher had I heard it by then, because it easily would have been top five or so for me). I really don't see any flaws to the old way, you guys are just petrified that God forbid something un-metal sneaks ahead of something that is inarguably metal but still really lame.

Maiden33
12-13-2008, 06:54 AM
I'm also getting pissed that the standard for our failed system that no one ever bitched about is the fact that The Con made last year's top ten (it would have been higher had I heard it by then, because it easily would have been top five or so for me). I really don't see any flaws to the old way, you guys are just petrified that God forbid something un-metal sneaks ahead of something that is inarguably metal but still really lame.

Get off of your high horse, no one cares.

This has absolutely nothing to do with me being scared that a non-metal album might be better than a metal album. We're comparing apples to oranges, and even if it is, it's not the point.

Sinfulsot
12-13-2008, 07:48 AM
Would it work better if it was just a top ten instead of having them numbered from 1 to 10?
That could work.

and if they really have to be numbered, once the top ten have been fleshed out, then another round of voting, where one's #1 choice gets 10 points, #2 get's 9, etc.

SomewhereInTime72
12-13-2008, 12:42 PM
Get off of your high horse, no one cares.

This has absolutely nothing to do with me being scared that a non-metal album might be better than a metal album. We're comparing apples to oranges, and even if it is, it's not the point.

No, he's right. If not that, what exactly has prompted this discussion?

ravenheart
12-13-2008, 12:53 PM
I agree with no points system. We are, after all, trying to demonstrate what we AS A BOARD rate from this year.

Taking the Nostradamus example. Say 10 of us vote. 9 have Nostradamus at #10, 1 point each, 9 points.

ONE of us has something NO ONE ELSE has voted for at #1, 10 points, it beats Nostradamus.

That's not reflective of the board. If we were a bigger board, the points thing could work, but while we're such a small community, and one vote on a points system can have such a large effect on the final 'chart', I don't think it works.

ChildrenofSodom
12-13-2008, 01:10 PM
Get off of your high horse, no one cares.

This has absolutely nothing to do with me being scared that a non-metal album might be better than a metal album. We're comparing apples to oranges, and even if it is, it's not the point.

Comparing apples to apples is boring.

mankvill
12-13-2008, 04:01 PM
Comparing apples to apples is boring.

I take offense to that.

Div
12-13-2008, 04:23 PM
I agree with no points system. We are, after all, trying to demonstrate what we AS A BOARD rate from this year.

Taking the Nostradamus example. Say 10 of us vote. 9 have Nostradamus at #10, 1 point each, 9 points.

ONE of us has something NO ONE ELSE has voted for at #1, 10 points, it beats Nostradamus.

That's not reflective of the board. If we were a bigger board, the points thing could work, but while we're such a small community, and one vote on a points system can have such a large effect on the final 'chart', I don't think it works.

:agree:


it shouldnt be that an album can be voted for once but still receive more points than other albums that were in multiple people's lists.

the reason this thread even exists in the first place is because theres enough people who feel that the voting system is screwed up in some shape or form. it should be apparent that SOMETHING needs to be done differently this year. if you guys dont like the idea i suggested thats fine, but so far noone else has proposed anything.

DethMaiden
12-13-2008, 04:25 PM
I still think there should be some distinction for people's overall favorite albums. Maybe a person's 1, 2, and 3 should be able to get 4, 3, and 2 points, while 4-10 all get 1.

Maiden33
12-13-2008, 04:28 PM
In my opinion both voting systems are horribly flawed for the reasons everyone has mentioned.

What we need is for someone to devise a weighting system where both forms of voting balance eachother out. For instance:

Have a certain percentage of votes added onto an albums score if it aquires a certain number of votes. Something to give albums point advantages for having more votes than those with fewer, without making it fair game for absolutely everything regardless of place. If someone comes up with a solid, working formula for that, I think everyone goes home happy.

DethMaiden
12-13-2008, 04:34 PM
In my opinion both voting systems are horribly flawed for the reasons everyone has mentioned.

What we need is for someone to devise a weighting system where both forms of voting balance eachother out. For instance:

Have a certain percentage of votes added onto an albums score if it aquires a certain number of votes. Something to give albums point advantages for having more votes than those with fewer, without making it fair game for absolutely everything regardless of place. If someone comes up with a solid, working formula for that, I think everyone goes home happy.

We're metalheads, not mathematicians. :dorky:

overkiller
12-13-2008, 04:36 PM
I agree with no points system. We are, after all, trying to demonstrate what we AS A BOARD rate from this year.

Taking the Nostradamus example. Say 10 of us vote. 9 have Nostradamus at #10, 1 point each, 9 points.

ONE of us has something NO ONE ELSE has voted for at #1, 10 points, it beats Nostradamus.

That's not reflective of the board. If we were a bigger board, the points thing could work, but while we're such a small community, and one vote on a points system can have such a large effect on the final 'chart', I don't think it works.

How about something like this:

Keep the old scoring system, but add this parameter: If more than one person votes for an album, that album's final tally is awarded an extra number of points equal to the number of people who voted for it. If only one person votes for an album, it gets no such bonus points.

So, in the Nostradamus example above, 9 people vote with Nostradamus at #10, which yields it 9 points, then add an additional 9 bonus points for multiple voters. Nostradamus gets 18 total points.

Another example. 3 people vote for the new Amon Amarth. One person has it at #3, another at #6, another at #8. 8 + 5 + 3 + (3 multiple-voter points) = 19.

To make a bigger difference, it could even be 2 points per voter, since we have relatively few people here. So in the Amon Amarth example, 8 + 5 +3 + (6 multiple-voter points) = 22.


Just an idea.

DethMaiden
12-13-2008, 04:37 PM
How about something like this:

Keep the old scoring system, but add this parameter: If more than one person votes for an album, that album's final tally is awarded an extra number of points equal to the number of people who voted for it. If only one person votes for an album, it gets no such bonus points.

So, in the Nostradamus example above, 9 people vote with Nostradamus at #10, which yields it 9 points, then add an additional 9 bonus points for multiple voters. Nostradamus gets 18 total points.

Another example. 3 people vote for the new Amon Amarth. One person has it at #3, another at #6, another at #8. 8 + 5 + 3 + (3 multiple-voter points) = 19.

To make a bigger difference, it could even be 2 points per voter, since we have relatively few people here. So in the Amon Amarth example, 8 + 5 +3 + (6 multiple-voter points) = 25.


Just an idea.

Shit...I like that idea a lot. And the 2x multiplier makes it even better I think.

Maiden33
12-13-2008, 04:37 PM
How about something like this:

Keep the old scoring system, but add this parameter: If more than one person votes for an album, that album's final tally is awarded an extra number of points equal to the number of people who voted for it. If only one person votes for an album, it gets no such bonus points.

So, in the Nostradamus example above, 9 people vote with Nostradamus at #10, which yields it 9 points, then add an additional 9 bonus points for multiple voters. Nostradamus gets 18 total points.

Another example. 3 people vote for the new Amon Amarth. One person has it at #3, another at #6, another at #8. 8 + 5 + 3 + (3 multiple-voter points) = 19.

To make a bigger difference, it could even be 2 points per voter, since we have relatively few people here. So in the Amon Amarth example, 8 + 5 +3 + (6 multiple-voter points) = 25.


Just an idea.

Yeah, more or less the idea I just came up with like two posts ago. ;)

DethMaiden
12-13-2008, 04:38 PM
Yeah, more or less the idea I just came up with like two posts ago. ;)

Yeah, but you used the word "formula" and I basically tuned out. :tongue:

overkiller
12-13-2008, 04:40 PM
We're metalheads, not mathematicians. :dorky:

And this is evidenced by the fact that I originally said 8 + 5 + 3 + 6 = 25 :lol:

I couldn't edit my post quick enough :D

overkiller
12-13-2008, 04:41 PM
Yeah, more or less the idea I just came up with like two posts ago. ;)

Didn't see it :tongue:

DethMaiden
12-13-2008, 04:43 PM
So should we take a vote on whether Brady's formula will be the new scoring system or not? I think we could get a near-unanimous majority, honestly.

Maiden33
12-13-2008, 04:45 PM
So should we take a vote on whether Brady's formula will be the new scoring system or not? I think we could get a near-unanimous majority, honestly.

Yeah, let's do it, but first it should be spelled out in absolute black and white to prevent any confusion or arguing.

DethMaiden
12-13-2008, 04:46 PM
Yeah, let's do it, but first it should be spelled out in absolute black and white to prevent any confusion or arguing.

Start the poll at your will. I think we're making some real progress, haha.

Maiden33
12-13-2008, 04:52 PM
Start the poll at your will. I think we're making some real progress, haha.

Well I'll start the poll, but I'm just saying I'd prefer to have an absolutely 100% clear scoring system explanation, including both math explanation and examples as were provided, just more cut-and-dry. Once that's out in the open, we're good to go I think.

powerslave_85
12-13-2008, 04:55 PM
So what should be the minimum for it to be "multiple voters?" I think either 3 or 4 would be a good number.

DethMaiden
12-13-2008, 04:57 PM
So what should be the minimum for it to be "multiple voters?" I think either 3 or 4 would be a good number.

Three sounds good to me, just because of the relative smallness of the site.

And I can orchestrate an Excel formula for the voting as well, so I'd be happy to run the polling again.

overkiller
12-13-2008, 04:58 PM
I'll admit that my system doesn't entirely account for a situation where a very few people rank an album very high.

Example: 2 people vote for an album, both giving it their #1 spot. Though only two people voted for it, and thus it gets 4 bonus points, the album's final tally = 24, which is still a considerable number.

DethMaiden
12-13-2008, 04:59 PM
I'll admit that my system doesn't entirely account for a situation where a very few people rank an album very high.

Example: 2 people vote for an album, both giving it their #1 spot. Though only two people voted for it, and thus it gets 4 bonus points, the album's final tally = 24, which is still a considerable number.

But Nick's proposal of a 3 person threshold for earning bonus would alleviate that to some degree.

Maiden33
12-13-2008, 05:02 PM
And MetalSetlists peace may once again be restored, at least until the votes start coming in.

overkiller
12-13-2008, 05:02 PM
But Nick's proposal of a 3 person threshold for earning bonus would alleviate that to some degree.

Yeah, I think it might. Didn't see that before I posted.

overkiller
12-13-2008, 05:03 PM
And MetalSetlists peace may once again be restored, at least until the votes start coming in.

Glad I could be of help :D Listening to Atheist gives you good ideas!!

Maiden33
12-13-2008, 05:04 PM
But Nick's proposal of a 3 person threshold for earning bonus would alleviate that to some degree.

Yeah, 3 or 4 is a good number. We're a relatively small group, and the rare examples where an album becomes a phenomenon for a small number of people should be kept in check by that.

powerslave_85
12-13-2008, 05:05 PM
And MetalSetlists peace may once again be restored, at least until the votes start coming in.
Don't worry, I only share one non-metal band with Brad's list (and he ranks it pretty low), and none with Brady, so it looks like you guys will have nothing to bitch about this year ;)

Maiden33
12-13-2008, 05:06 PM
Don't worry, I only share one non-metal band with Brad's list (and he ranks it pretty low), and none with Brady, so it looks like you guys will have nothing to bitch about this year ;)

Well I'm kind of working against myself as well. In 2006 I saw my #1 album get into the top 10 (#8 I believe) from only like 3-4 people voting for it.

Div
12-13-2008, 05:09 PM
what about not giving any multiplier points to albums that make the #1 spot?

ex. 1 person gives album x #1 (=10 points) another person gives x number 7 (=4 points) so it only gets half of the multiplier because one of the votes was in number 1. so 10(#1) + 4(#7) + 1(as opposed to 2) = 15 points.

overkiller
12-13-2008, 05:09 PM
Well I'm kind of working against myself as well.

As am I... I'm just now realizing that my list is basically gonna count for shit, except maybe my vote for Watershed :lol:

DethMaiden
12-13-2008, 05:10 PM
what about not giving any multiplier points to albums that make the #1 spot?

ex. 1 person gives album x #1 (=10 points) another person gives x number 7 (=4 points) so it only gets half of the multiplier because one of the votes was in number 1. so 10(#1) + 4(#7) + 1(as opposed to 2) = 15 points.

That seems unnecessarily complex, and works to undermine people who want to put an album in first. It might even result in someone being strategic and moving their true #1 to #2 so it gets the multiplier (hey, it's out there, but you were the paranoid one in the first place). I say no.

overkiller
12-13-2008, 05:11 PM
That seems unnecessarily complex, and works to undermine people who want to put an album in first. It might even result in someone being strategic and moving their true #1 to #2 so it gets the multiplier (hey, it's out there, but you were the paranoid one in the first place). I say no.

Hmm yeah, seconded.

powerslave_85
12-13-2008, 05:13 PM
That seems unnecessarily complex, and works to undermine people who want to put an album in first. It might even result in someone being strategic and moving their true #1 to #2 so it gets the multiplier (hey, it's out there, but you were the paranoid one in the first place). I say no.
No, punishing people for putting something at #1 is kind of pointless.

Maiden33
12-13-2008, 05:13 PM
That seems unnecessarily complex, and works to undermine people who want to put an album in first. It might even result in someone being strategic and moving their true #1 to #2 so it gets the multiplier (hey, it's out there, but you were the paranoid one in the first place). I say no.

Thirded.

Div
12-13-2008, 05:18 PM
well are we still going to force people to post 10 albums to get full credit, or can they just post as few albums as they like but their #1 still gets 10 points, etc.?

zgodt
12-13-2008, 08:07 PM
I would just like to take this opportunity to laugh at the fact that this discussion has lasted 11 pages and counting, arguing both the theory and practice of a year end top-ten list that no one cares about or has the faintest idea even exists, outside our provincial little band of 30 or so posters on a site no one has heard of.

Dude. Hahahahahaha.

DethMaiden
12-13-2008, 08:19 PM
I would just like to take this opportunity to laugh at the fact that this discussion has lasted 11 pages and counting, arguing both the theory and practice of a year end top-ten list that no one cares about or has the faintest idea even exists, outside our provincial little band of 30 or so posters on a site no one has heard of.

Dude. Hahahahahaha.

As long as you vote, you can laugh all you want. :dorky:

es156
12-13-2008, 08:28 PM
I would just like to take this opportunity to laugh at the fact that this discussion has lasted 11 pages and counting, arguing both the theory and practice of a year end top-ten list that no one cares about or has the faintest idea even exists, outside our provincial little band of 30 or so posters on a site no one has heard of.

Dude. Hahahahahaha.

Who cares if no one else "knows about it?" I don't think anyone here is looking for national recognition.


:tp:

overkiller
12-13-2008, 09:23 PM
I would just like to take this opportunity to laugh at the fact that this discussion has lasted 11 pages and counting, arguing both the theory and practice of a year end top-ten list that no one cares about or has the faintest idea even exists, outside our provincial little band of 30 or so posters on a site no one has heard of.

Dude. Hahahahahaha.

:zzz:

mankvill
12-13-2008, 09:31 PM
I COME TO THIS SITE TO GET AWAY FROM ALGEBRA

a'lsidfjaiosejfASDFASPDFiajsijpdfA

ravenheart
12-14-2008, 07:37 AM
We're metalheads, not mathematicians. :dorky:

Speak for yourself ;)

ChildrenofSodom
12-14-2008, 08:54 AM
Speak for yourself ;)

nerd.

SomewhereInTime72
12-14-2008, 11:00 AM
I COME TO THIS SITE TO GET AWAY FROM ALGEBRA

a'lsidfjaiosejfASDFASPDFiajsijpdfA

:lol: :lol:

Brady's system seems better, lets use it.

overkiller
12-14-2008, 02:14 PM
Ok, so, if we're going with my system... Bonus points = 2 points per "multiple voter"? And 3 ore more people must vote for an album for it to gain multiple voter points (you've all said "3 or 4")? Okay? Should I make the poll thread?

DethMaiden
12-14-2008, 05:23 PM
Ok, so, if we're going with my system... Bonus points = 2 points per "multiple voter"? And 3 ore more people must vote for an album for it to gain multiple voter points (you've all said "3 or 4")? Okay? Should I make the poll thread?

Yes.

Div
12-14-2008, 05:45 PM
3 sounds good.

also, 10 albums arent required to get full credit for your list.

overkiller
12-14-2008, 05:50 PM
also, 10 albums arent required to get full credit for your list.

Wait, did we really decide on this?

DethMaiden
12-14-2008, 05:52 PM
Wait, did we really decide on this?

We certainly didn't. And I'm against it.

Div
12-14-2008, 07:03 PM
dude its bullshit, it just forces people to put albums on their list that they dont want to and i dont see what purpose it serves.

ChildrenofSodom
12-14-2008, 07:06 PM
dude its bullshit, it just forces people to put albums on their list that they dont want to and i dont see what purpose it serves.

Who honestly didnt hear ten albums this year?

Div
12-14-2008, 07:11 PM
thats not a reason to force people to fluff out their lists. why should people be penalized if they dont want to put down 10 albums? how does that effect anyone else?

ChildrenofSodom
12-14-2008, 07:18 PM
thats not a reason to force people to fluff out their lists. why should people be penalized if they dont want to put down 10 albums? how does that effect anyone else?

Why should everyone else be forced to limit their opinions?

Div
12-14-2008, 08:13 PM
what the hell kind of argument is that? get out of here with your semantics

ChildrenofSodom
12-14-2008, 08:24 PM
For years we have done the count this way. 10 is a nice round number, backed by the precedent of millions of other 'top lists'. We are already doing enough to change the scoring system. If we are going to change every single facet of this entire meaningless little thing, then why do it at all?

Picking 10 albums doesnt require you to 'fluff' your list. If you heard 10 albums,which you should have, then rank them from best to worst. Think of it as a ranking, more than a list of your favorites. #1 you liked the most, #10 you liked the least.

The point of this whole poll is to express your opinions. If you aren't smart/cultured enough to have an opinion on 10 albums then you should GTFO because the rest of us here arent going to dumb ourselves down for your comfort. Sometimes you have to conform to the system, at least when its a for-fun online poll about music.

Div
12-14-2008, 08:29 PM
but how does voting for less than 10 albums cause other people to "dumb themselves down"?

ChildrenofSodom
12-14-2008, 08:45 PM
but how does voting for less than 10 albums cause other people to "dumb themselves down"?

Because this thread is to share your opinion on ten albums. Just because you can only name 6, that doesnt mean my opinion on those last 4 shouldnt count.

overkiller
12-14-2008, 08:49 PM
CoS is somewhat right. If you're going to participate in this kind of thing, you should have enough interest in it to hear at least 10 albums in a year. Otherwise, you simply can't be that interested and your opinion should not weigh equally with everyone else's.

Div
12-14-2008, 08:50 PM
but you would still be able to vote for 10! your votes wouldnt be compromised!

asjkaskldfs

ive had it with this thread,

you know what

you know what?!

YOU KNOW WHAT?!?!?!!!111








im going to the dining hall to get breakfast.

overkiller
12-14-2008, 08:54 PM
but you would still be able to vote for 10! your votes wouldnt be compromised!

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the opinion of someone who doesn't manage to hear at least 10 albums in a WHOLE YEAR should not weigh equally with everyone else.

Div
12-14-2008, 08:58 PM
i was under the impression that the list was meant for favorite albums, the special ones that really jumped out at you, not just for ranking misc. records you've heard. ive heard tons of albums this year, but i havent heard 10 from 2008 yet that i think would be good to post here. i really dont want to put stuff like Bonded by Blood (the band) on my list.

overkiller
12-15-2008, 10:14 AM
i was under the impression that the list was meant for favorite albums, the special ones that really jumped out at you, not just for ranking misc. records you've heard. ive heard tons of albums this year, but i havent heard 10 from 2008 yet that i think would be good to post here. i really dont want to put stuff like Bonded by Blood (the band) on my list.

Alright, well, I can see how in that case you'd feel like you were "fluffing out" your list if you put on stuff you don't think deserves any points. But really, there's enough good stuff out there for you to hear that making a list of 10 albums you at least enjoy shouldn't be too hard, and where exactly is the harm in hearing new music?

Plus, as far as I can remember I think you're the only one with this gripe, so I don't really think that's enough to make it a stipulation of the new rules.

ChildrenofSodom
12-15-2008, 01:46 PM
Alright, well, I can see how in that case you'd feel like you were "fluffing out" your list if you put on stuff you don't think deserves any points. But really, there's enough good stuff out there for you to hear that making a list of 10 albums you at least enjoy shouldn't be too hard, and where exactly is the harm in hearing new music?

Plus, as far as I can remember I think you're the only one with this gripe, so I don't really think that's enough to make it a stipulation of the new rules.

And by elimination indie albums, wouldnt we be further limiting people's lists?

methinks someone is trying to be a contrarian.

Maiden33
12-15-2008, 01:51 PM
This is the best thread ever. Doesn't it just make you excited to actually vote and discuss voting and results!?!?!

DethMaiden
12-15-2008, 01:58 PM
This is the best thread ever. Doesn't it just make you excited to actually vote and discuss voting and results!?!?!

:lol: Seriously. That thread is going to have a million pages based on this.

overkiller
12-15-2008, 03:48 PM
And by elimination indie albums, wouldnt we be further limiting people's lists?

methinks someone is trying to be a contrarian.

I... don't understand what you're saying here.

Div
12-15-2008, 04:28 PM
And by elimination indie albums, wouldnt we be further limiting people's lists?

methinks someone is trying to be a contrarian.


dude we stopped talking about making it "metal only" like 100 pages ago.

DethMaiden
12-15-2008, 05:35 PM
dude we stopped talking about making it "metal only" like 100 pages ago.

:lol: I love this thread so much.

ChildrenofSodom
12-15-2008, 06:15 PM
dude we stopped talking about making it "metal only" like 100 pages ago.

Every fucking aspect of this entire process you have had a problem with. If its not this, its that.

JRA
12-15-2008, 09:12 PM
This is a fucking failure in my eyes.

TonyD
12-17-2008, 05:59 PM
Will we be able to vote for a single song if it was put out as a single?

Div
12-17-2008, 06:12 PM
i believe so.

DethMaiden
12-17-2008, 06:24 PM
Will we be able to vote for a single song if it was put out as a single?

If it didn't also appear on an EP or album. Do any bands really just release singles and not put them elsewhere these days? :eyes:

TonyD
12-17-2008, 07:44 PM
No, they don't, so that answers my question.

Maiden33
12-17-2008, 09:39 PM
If it didn't also appear on an EP or album. Do any bands really just release singles and not put them elsewhere these days? :eyes:

Methinks a few bands would be better off never releasing more than 3 songs at a time.

zgodt
12-22-2008, 05:41 AM
Methinks a few bands would be better off never releasing more than 3 songs at a time.

Trouble is they would never pick the right 3.

ADD
12-01-2009, 05:06 PM
If you go all metal, then who decides what is or isn't "metal"?
Thus there are really only 2 options in this poll.

mankvill
12-01-2009, 05:59 PM
Thus there are really only 2 options in this poll.

wow bro your internet is fucking sssslllloooowwww

ADD
12-01-2009, 06:35 PM
wow bro your internet is fucking sssslllloooowwww

:lol: Also why was this thread back on the first page? I only posted and voted cuz I saw it here :eyes:

SomewhereInTime72
12-01-2009, 06:37 PM
I think poll threads can be bumped by new votes and posts. Magic invisible bumping ftw?

ADD
12-01-2009, 06:42 PM
I think poll threads can be bumped by new votes and posts. Magic invisible bumping ftw?
Ah. Well now that we're here, I liks mai diversity :D Actually that's kinda misleading since all my top 10 fit within the rock/metal paradigm, but whatever.