Anonymity in 1v1s

[Dova]

I personally agree with this concept, as if you know who made each card, it can be easy to determine who made either one, and it might influence your vote. However, this isn't really that enforced, some people use differing card creators, some people add different things to their cards, heck, some people do written and others do generated in the same competition.

 

What I'm saying is, while being able to tell people part by OCG can be guessing, people make cards differently, and while I normally wait to see what my opponent submits in order to adjust my cards to fit theirs more, so that its harder to tell apart, sometimes its difficult, and I think that maybe a set format could be discussed for designing cards, e.g. "No Copyright/Include Copyright" "No Rarity/Gold Rarity"

[ENMaker]

I've only hosted like 2 but I adapted my card to fit the format of my opponent's submissions in both cases or vice versa, and that should really be an across the board thing if this rule is to be properly implemented.

[Dova]

An alternative is not to have a base across all 1v1s, but a base agreed on between the host and the contender.

 

I mean, this has been done before, as we both said, but I feel that in many 1v1s telling creators apart is not hard.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

How about just all over CC

 

If you're supposed to judge a cards merit, you have no reason to know who made the card, each "person" should submit as a number and find out at a later time

[Trebuchet MS]

I have an idea.

 

1v1s are all written - that way, whoever's hosting can format both entries to be identical, even in the way the card details are expressed. OCG concerns can be discussed with the other participant to get consistent formatting so that writing habits are harder to spot between the entries.

 

Yeah, there may be a few more flaws I need to iron out, but...

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

I mean aside from Leaderboard, there is no real regulation on 1v1 in the first place, so wouldn't it make more sense to suggest this to striker?

 

Besides, even if votes are swayed by knowing who is who, reasoning is required for votes so it self-fixes in a sense.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I have an idea.

 

1v1s are all written - that way, whoever's hosting can format both entries to be identical, even in the way the card details are expressed. OCG concerns can be discussed with the other participant to get consistent formatting so that writing habits are harder to spot between the entries.

 

Yeah, there may be a few more flaws I need to iron out, but...

Can we do something about all CC?

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

How about just all over CC

 

If you're supposed to judge a cards merit, you have no reason to know who made the card, each "person" should submit as a number and find out at a later time

Can we do something about all CC?

This is a joke, right? Overcomplicate a system that has no need for such, making it confusing for new members and a hassle for old ones? Seriously? At this point I am pretty sure you are just spamming.

[Trebuchet MS]

Can we do something about all CC?

Is it not enough that judges are commonly expected (and usually asked) to provide justification for their marking, even though we don't have rules that enforce that?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

This is a joke, right? Overcomplicate a system that has no need for such, making it confusing for new members and a hassle for old ones? Seriously? At this point I am pretty sure you are just spamming.

It's not, I think there are biases that might unfairly sway tournaments. I will concede this might not be the place for it though

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

It's not, I think there are biases that might unfairly sway tournaments. I will concede this might not be the place for it though

I mean tournaments aren't exactly all of CC.

 

Even then, when I judged the monthly a while back with... I can't actually remember who judged with me... we didn't really take who the creator was into account. Of course, I can't say that isn't the case now, but if you have a standard method of judging it does a lot to eliminate bias.

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

You had Toyo helping you and me with the June monthly (though the amount you had to grade was very minimal; as in 3-4 people).

 

But otherwise, it really doesn't matter who made the card. In the past, there were votes that literally were for a member because they know it came from a good member or something along those lines. Nowadays, that is forbidden. 

 

----

It would make sense to have all 1v1 participants remove their names from the card itself, regardless of Leaderboard status or not. Though to be fair, most, if not all of the 1v1s in there right now are already Leaderboard (non-Leaderboards are permissible, but that usually goes to newer members as of late), so that rule should already be implied. 

 

Is it not enough that judges are commonly expected (and usually asked) to provide justification for their marking, even though we don't have rules that enforce that?

 

For the most part, it is generally enough. (I don't know if I actually specified it in the general 1v1 rules [i should have, but will need to check], but I know general contests has some rules that mention valid reasoning is required for scoring.)

 

Even if you know who made a card, you actually have to explain why you vote for a card (and "because (x) member made it" is not a valid reason). By now, I can more/less tell certain members by their OCG styles and the like, but even then, a card gets voted for if it's properly designed for the theme / general balance (or if both aren't up to par, and card C votes aren't an option; which card is more passable)

 

----

Written card requirements are something I'd be willing to consider, since it would save the hassle of actually needing the cardmaker and/or finding an appropriate picture (a lot of us do written b/c lack of suitable images that fit our liking). Rewriting the OCG fixing might work, but just make sure both are written in the same style (which is usually PSCT). If participants need help on that, Gadjiltron and I are more than welcome to assist on that regard. 

[宇佐見 蓮子@C94]

no

 

unnecessary rule is unnecessary. like giga said having to use justification to make your vote acceptable more or less already fixes the problem, so any further rules would just overcomplicate matters to a point where old members find it a hassle and new members find it confusing.

 

it shouldnt be on the card makers to alleviate dumb sheet voters voting for shitty reasons, that's on them. if people are voting just purely due to who made that card, just reject that vote. it's not that funking difficult, and it's not like it's not obvious if they're only praising a card from a purely subjective level, so having to make all entrants anonymous is just a massive waste of everyone's time as well as an unnecessary hassle.

 

if people are voting not due to the merits of the card itself, and due to personal bias, funk em. just funk em. if their reasoning for a vote is bad, just reject it. it's not difficult at all.

[Dova]

1v1s are all written

 

Your idea is great, but not all 1v1s are written. Perhaps a format could just be agreed upon in the OP, but many 1v1s have actual cards.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Your idea is great, but not all 1v1s are written. Perhaps a format could just be agreed upon in the OP, but many 1v1s have actual cards.

his idea is for them to be all written

[Dova]

his idea is for them to be all written

 

Oops, thought it was an assumption. And I'm torn. That would be good, very good at solving the problems...but sometimes cards aren't the same that way. All in all, I'd go with that.

[Trebuchet MS]

As the Leaderboards are more of Striker's domain, I believe he should have the final say.

[♪ ♪Aria ♪ ♪]

Anonymity is only for those who lacks self-confidence, like myself.........Which has pros and cons

The pros are subjectivity can be avoided as well as other influence, such as underestimating a new member's card.....

 

But when there's a good side, there's always a reverse one, in this case like most of us had already discussed, counterfeit and falsification of cards might occur every now and then, so basically, I couldn't correspond to this idea.....

[Trebuchet MS]

But when there's a good side, there's always a reverse one, in this case like most of us had already discussed, counterfeit and falsification of cards might occur every now and then, so basically, I couldn't correspond to this idea.....

Remember that the challenger submits their card via private message, and should be able to call out the host if their card turns out different from their submission.

 

...Wait, if you're talking about the copyright and holographic square, these should be trivial details that generally are not worried about unless it carries the creator's name.

[Nathanael D. Striker]

Anonymity has always been one of the more interesting topics in 1v1 (and Card Contests too, but not as much). Gadjiltron's idea of having all cards be written does help, though wording style can pose a problem. If Gadjiltron and Sakura are willing wish to be a resource in helping the Card Grammar between both cards, I'll allow that. So yea, let's test this out for a bit and see how it goes. Before we do, thoughts?

[Maeriberii Haan]

I'd rather have the card be unaltered, OCG-wise. While judging based on OCG or putting emphasis on it, especially in 1v1, would be disgusting, if there's a vital ambiguity on how the card works due to bad wording, then it should all be on the participant to bear. Not to mention the possibility of an unintentional change happening during the cleanups.

 

But I suppose a trial of both would be necessary.

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

Well, it makes sense that your card is worded properly so voters can understand what you're doing. Card contests has OCG as a grading factor for that reason (and unless your card is really hard to read, most people generally do fine); if your card grammar is bad, chances are that your design intent will be misconstrued and you might lose more points in other areas.

 

If there are unintended changes, we can ask the competitors what their design intent was and readjust the OCG accordingly, BUT that would also go under fixing their card in terms of design, to some degree.
 

Remember that the challenger submits their card via private message, and should be able to call out the host if their card turns out different from their submission.
 
...Wait, if you're talking about the copyright and holographic square, these should be trivial details that generally are not worried about unless it carries the creator's name.

I have no idea what he's going on about, but yeah copyright and the holo square shouldn't matter, except for former if the creator actually puts their name on it (there's only some much MS Paint/photo editing to erase the name that we're willing to do). If you use YCM's one, the default is still the unlimited/OCG square.
 
 

Anonymity is only for those who lacks self-confidence, like myself.........Which has pros and cons
The pros are subjectivity can be avoided as well as other influence, such as underestimating a new member's card.....
 

 
It's standard procedure since the creation of Leaderboard that all competitors remove their name from the card. As mentioned before, there were cases in the past where people voted on someone's card just because a popular member made it or some other reason. Nowadays, those reasons will be rejected; even if we didn't mandate anonymity.

 

Even if you know who made what card (or have an idea), you're expected to put that aside and vote as if you didn't know.

[Nathanael D. Striker]

I'd rather have the card be unaltered, OCG-wise. While judging based on OCG or putting emphasis on it, especially in 1v1, would be disgusting, if there's a vital ambiguity on how the card works due to bad wording, then it should all be on the participant to bear. Not to mention the possibility of an unintentional change happening during the cleanups.

 

But I suppose a trial of both would be necessary.

I was talking more about wording style and formatting tbh since everything else held equal, wording style and formatting can reveal who is who.

[Trebuchet MS]

We can test this on a personal level. I'll try out the formatting standardization in my next 1v1.