Beatronome, on 30 September 2013 - 03:39 PM, said:
I don't really consider these battles as something I need to win in order to grow as a producer; the beauty of the battles is hearing other peoples flips and getting respect from peers. I voted most of the times when I could cause if no one votes that kind of defeats the purpose of the battle format, but you also have to consider that for most of the producers on here, these beat battles are something they do in their spare time, picking a winner is, in essence, just something extra to decide who picks the sample for the week after.
The only time I "won" a battle was when someone didn't vote and the winner from the week before had stated in the rules that voting was obligatory. I can tell you that there really is no pride, or whatever you're looking for, in winning in such a manner. The only thing that happens is you take some shine of a legit victory by saying "oh sorry, you didn't vote". That will be the only effect, you can't MAKE people change their attitude towards something they do in their spare time by imposing rules. A rule isn't really an incentive in a free online battle now is it?
And so it is for me... where did I, or anyone for that matter, say they need to win this battle in order to grow as a producer? I do this in my spare time as well. And I still think it's only a question of respect to go vote if you take part. More respect/involvement = better community = ultimately better beats. If I follow your reasoning to its logical conclusion, why not scrap voting altogether? Exactly... cause this is still a battle. And voting, just as a feedback, still is important. It just sucks for all of us when 60% of the people don't bother.
Now Heavy Drama's point-of-view about the problem with enforcing the rule, NOW we talking. Only decent argument I've seen until now. But this is my opinion:
Heavy Drama, on 30 September 2013 - 04:06 PM, said:
"No vote=no entry and ban (without valid excuse)" is childish at best and extremely problematic because it is highly subjective and no one person or group has the authority to determine what is or is not a valid reason for not voting, as well as the fact that if one of the "stronger" producers in the group makes a mistake and forgets to vote banning them will only weaken the overall standard thus defeating the purpose of the rule and the whole point of this thread.
I say no vote = no entry (if no valid excuse), and banning if repeated 3 times.
I get your point, and it is subjective what a valid reason for not voting is, but it's not necessarily problematic at all.
Why not say: Any excuse is good, but do post about it in the voting thread? Hell, I wouldn't even mind if someone said "I can't vote, i'm hanging out with my girflriend and I can't be bothered". At least he would've taken the time and respect to let his fellow peers know. I mean, I voted JonWayne last week...
This rule is
enforceable, as long as somebody keeps track of it. I'm willing to do so. Also, 3 times would leave enough room for everybody to be lazy sometime, or for someone to forget it. We could even reset the quota every year or something. Thing is all the entries who only
go posting tracks for plays/comments/follows and never bother with this forum would be filtered out.
To say that this is childish is also highly subjective
Why not have a vote on this? (a-hum...) For real. We could post this question in a separate thread (just for sake of clarity), leave it open for 2 weeks, get as many producers as possible to vote, and see how many ppl say yay or no? A bunch have already taken position on this thread. If the majority is against, I rest my case.