95 replies to this topic

[BigFoot]

Anyway...I am taking suggestions seriously...so please feel free to leave your thoughts here...this topic has now turned into a suggestion box... :">

Change the name.

Now.

[mantis]

Oh dear

Why's the judging process so complicated? Why not just have a member-vote?

Would make more sense, and would reduce the leeway for people to complain...

[Rct Flame]

Well, since I'm not on the staff with this any more (Thank god, my schedule in school this year is horrendous Homework wise), I'll post my suggestions.

-Select a panel of four judges. These four judges stay forever until they ask to leave. Make sure that they know they will be judging more than one month. The fifth rotating member will be the previous winner. It's obvious that member participation can't go much farther than entering parks ( ).

-Bump up theming to 20 points like I had originall planned ( ). It's obvious that the community tends to lean towards the better theming, so this should be huge in points, even if certain aspects are picked apart in seperate areas. Sure, the seperate ideas of theming are produced, but "theming" in general is more about how every "theming" element fits together. Big Diffie.

-You MUST have an overall power over the judges. If they all pick a winner, but you don't feel that it meets the criteria for a VP (as you so stated a few posts below), you need to step in and for the good of the competition pull that months voting. Even if you extend it to 2 months with those parks in the pool for runner-up and have a mega comp, to just flat out restarting, something needs to be done (obviously). Now that I'm on "the outisde looking in" so to speak, these things appear more clear than they would had I still been on the project.

-DON'T release judges names until the next VP round. If people don't like the winner, I don't think the judges shold be named until the water "cools off". This just gets them competely out of the ring of fire so to speak. I know you don't like the idea, but you do need to take the blunt of everything said about the VP . As it is your project, you are the head, and the judges shouldn't have to take scrutiny individually, but as a whole along with you. No one knows who scored for what, but they now know the judges names. I sincerely hope that no judge has been pm'd about this.

Anywho, those are my suggestions. Take 'em or leave 'em.

[Gymkid]

whats with the rubric? How about judges just pick the best park, and rank them.

[AustinPowers]

Those are good ideas both Flame and Gymkid. Mantis' idea had already been discussed before we even started VP and members thought that would be too much of a popularity contest, so I don't think that's a good option. We are tossing around some ideas in staff now. Once the staff has discussed it, I will bring it to the members again for discussion. Meanwhile, keep posting your thoughts, however, I might be splitting this topic tomorrow and moving it to VP questions and answers forum.

Thanks for your comments so far.

[Impuls3]

Seems like this topic's more like "How can we fix the VP" rather than the "August 2003 VP," AKA the most controversial park evar to win a popular site's spotlight.

[Sambo]

There is a vast difference between fixing something that is broken and striving to continuously improve. It is a cruel twist that on one hand we get slammed for not listening to members or changing, and when we attempt to listen, solicit feedback and discussion to change for the better we get slammed for being broken in the first place.

Some days you just can't win...

[The Iron Dragon]

here's my comments on the park:

the park was great, i liked lots of the archy in the park,
great rides & roller coasters and nice themeing.

Congrats RCT:I!

[Enilk Libb Jr]

Here's an idea that may work, it would be hard to control though. You could have four judges, similar to the way it is now, but instead of two members from the boards, have one, and then in place of the other, use a poll to collect the opinions of the members. The park with most votes gets the equivalent of one judge's approval, and then the others are based on percentages of the first place one. It would be hard to prevent cheating though on this, but if a way could be found, it would give the community a lot more say

[davidk]

I'm not going to d/l until the next is released. I just d/led WisConSin