Naked Songfight (Things To Do in New York Reviews)

[HeuristicsInc]

Highest to lowest would be a giant huge freaking pain in the ass.
Especially when there are 20+ songs in a fight.
-bill

[j$]

It kinda irritates me when the votes don't really reflect the reviews.
Whatever.

Maybe you need to stop putting so much weight on your position in the vote? You recognise its arbitrary nature - so there should be no problem.

Whatever, indeed.

j$

[spacedog]

as i said before, if the voting is so arbitrary why bother having it at all?

[Mostess]

Voting doesn't mean shit..... we's (IMO) here for the reviews. Anyone here long enough should know that having your name in lights is not as cool as entering and winning squarely (in the review dept)....... also more people on the site means more exposure for everybody........ bring em all out cuz sometime one of them is going to hear Dylan Nau or a JBB song or MC Frontalot and drop their vote for their buddies for one of them..... that seems like a perfect reasoning for bringing more people.

This is right on, except for the voting doesn't mean shit part. Our newbie attempts at vote flooding failed miserably since friends actually listened to the songs and voted for their favorites.

My wife (not primarily a songwriter) is always surprised that well-reviewed songs that she doesn't like end up growing on her after a few months. Reviews are writen by songwriters, who are sensitive to certain things; most votes are probably cast by more casual listeners, who are sensitive to other stuff.

Yes, newbies get more votes than veterans. Yes, there are silly tricks you can pull that won't make a good song, but will get votes. Yes some people have cheated, and more will in the future. Some fights are more contaminated than others. And we can't really know the actual biases and intentions of each voter.

But largely, votes seem to flow to better songs.

[Bjam]

What do I get if I win?
Bragging rights. Satisfaction. The jealous glances of strangers sitting next to you on the subway.

I like the votes, because if I get more than someone else, I get those jealous glances.

And that feels good.

Or something

And of course yay reviews, reviews are fun.

[Caravan Ray]

I'm quite happy with the voting system. It's usually fairly obvious when the tally's are unrepresentative of actual song quality - that doesn't matter.

I do however get quite a buzz when somebody votes for me. Just to know that there is someone out there (even just one person as in this week) who appreciated my effort and liked my song enough to give it a vote is very satisfying.

The only (minor) gripe I have is when on occaisions (not this week) several people have expressed in their reviews that they will send their vote the Caravan Ray way - only to get to the end of the week and see my old friend 'Zero' in the vote tally

(NB: I am the last person who should complain about that last point - because I am frequently guilty of the same crime. To the 4 people who I said this week I would choose from for a vote - sorry - none of you got it - I forgot )

[j$]

as i said before, if the voting is so arbitrary why bother having it at all?

Because the structure it sets up is vital to keeping this site, and therefore (to me the most important thing) the community, alive.

And also because musicians are the vainest creatures on the face of the planet.

[Caravan Ray]

And also because musicians are the vainest creatures on the face of the planet.

Considering we are abnormally beautiful and talented - I think we have every right to be vain.

[EightLeggedOedipus]

If it weren't for the "chance to win" I probably never would have attempted any songs, not-to-mention submitted them. I lurked for a while before even becoming part of the community, but the voting was key to getting me to participate. I would rather keep it at the casual corruptible state, than make some voting system so crufty and prohibitive that only the elite votes count. Anyway, the only elite artists are those whose songs end up in our players. I hope (like many of you have) to benefit as a songwriter from this, and perhaps develop some fans and friends. Enemies are awesome, too.

[jack]

i've never gotten a dime richer from all of my songfight wins combined.

[erik]

if the voting is moot, why bother having voting at all?

Voting is not moot. Voting is very very important to the overall way that songfight works. Calling something a "contest" and having a "winner" subconsciously affects how seriously people (both the contestants and the audience) will take it. It makes the website visibly change on a weekly basis (as does the coverart). Without voting, the updates would all be the same: "Hey, there were some songs last week! Now there are some songs this week!"

What *is* meaningless is the overall results of the voting.

Also, there's no reason to believe that the overall consensus of the select few who hang around the messageboards should in anyway be mirrored in the larger pool of people that constitute the songfight voting population.

[j$]

he didn't say 'moot' he said 'arbitrary', and he was echoing my choice of word.

For the rest, you agree with what I said four posts further up, then? :p

[erik]

he didn't say 'moot' he said 'arbitrary', and he was echoing my choice of word.

For the rest, you agree with what I said four posts further up, then? :p

ummm, scroll up to the top of the page. I wasn't paraphrasing something he said, I was directly quoting him. It was something he said.

I didn't know we weren't allowed to say something that someone else may have said.

[historyman68]

Most of you (Heuristics) blew me off when I said this the first time, but there is a way to do this and not sacrifice either the "competition" aspect or the "unfair" aspect. Do an instant-runoff or modified instant-runoff system. Because I agree it would be a pain to rate every single song, maybe just rate the top three(3) or top 5(five) of each fight.
That wouldn't be complicated or convoluted, and would allow the voting to express a better view of song ratings.

I understand that we are in it for the winning. I, too, like Eight Legged Oedipus, hope to someday win. And I also do enjoy getting even one(1) vote, as Caravan Ray said.

My songfight genesis: at first, with my large musician ego, I was surprised when nobody voted for me. Then I realized that other people's songs were a lot better. Recently, I think my songwriting has gotten to another level where it's possible that I could, in the forseeable future, win, and I don't want that to be fucked up by some punk with thirty(51) friends.
But I will echo j$'s, and my own, sentiments:

Whatever.

[Caravan Ray]

stuff.

There is merit in what Mr History says.

In the Coverfight last year - the good/bad voting system was a refreshing change. I was pleased to see my entry get a quite high overall approval rating - although I'm sure if it was a 'first-past-the-post' vote - I would have probably got zero. At least I was able to guage how the quality of my entry was judged with respect to the other entries.

I know I'm wasting my voice typing this - but I'm bored - and I'm sitting in an office that was recently painted and the fumes are making me quite dizzy - I may throw up....

[j$]

he didn't say 'moot' he said 'arbitrary', and he was echoing my choice of word.

For the rest, you agree with what I said four posts further up, then? :p

ummm, scroll up to the top of the page. I wasn't paraphrasing something he said, I was directly quoting him. It was something he said.

I didn't know we weren't allowed to say something that someone else may have said.

Ha ha ha! Me and my gob of enormity! A thousand apologies, 15-16 P! Hoisted my own petard and all that.

I never said you weren't allowed. I was just being smug. And not for the first time.

j$

[Leaf]

stuff.

There is merit in what Mr History says.

In the Coverfight last year - the good/bad voting system was a refreshing change. I was pleased to see my entry get a quite high overall approval rating - although I'm sure if it was a 'first-past-the-post' vote - I would have probably got zero. At least I was able to guage how the quality of my entry was judged with respect to the other entries.

I know I'm wasting my voice typing this - but I'm bored - and I'm sitting in an office that was recently painted and the fumes are making me quite dizzy - I may throw up....

I agree...that was cool, but that was that and this is this...

I could care less if the "system" stayed as is, or was a "run -off" I see merit in both. I will totally agree with 15-16's points though... that pretty ,much sums it up.

From a philosophical point of view, my attitude is;(when I get the urge to actually care about voting and who's listening) is to check the stats page and see how many just listened. That's more important, for me, than the votes. And then, if I look at the amount of listens to the votes I got, I get this weird demographic percentage of the population of actual listeners to votes, the comparison of votes to reviews to listens, and if I'm either really bored or motivated (which I suppose amounts to both at the same time come to think of it) then I can look at : total number of votes overall, and the percentage I got; the total number of listens and the percentage I got, and finally the total number of listeners compared to votes I got.

And all that data analysis will ultimately lead to the same conclusion:

That of course being.....musicians are the most vain people on the planet. Which is a moot point however, as it is all arbitrary.

[erik]

Do an instant-runoff or modified instant-runoff system. Because I agree it would be a pain to rate every single song, maybe just rate the top three(3) or top 5(five) of each fight. That wouldn't be complicated or convoluted, and would allow the voting to express a better view of song ratings.

Imagine a fight with 26 bands entering, named A-Z. 40% of voters mark their ballots A B C. 35% of voters mark their ballots E F G. And 25% of the voters mark their ballots Z T J. Then what? Instant-runoff screws you, unless you want to make voters order all 26 songs.

If the voting method were changed to a method with a more complex algorithm for determining the winner (and I have no reason to think it will be) I would still want to know something which, to me, is the most important piece of information the vote at songfight can offer: How many people thought my song was the best song in the fight?

[jack]

historyman....for the first 3 weeks of january, your song "things to do in new york" was listened to 189 times. and it's only been posted for a week and a half. 8leggedoedipus....your song has been listened to 217 times so far since it's been posted. this is just in one week and a half.

to have 200 people listen to something you produced in a week is a godsend. to have a few of them willingly take the time to tell you what they think just adds to this. add to this the fact that as you submit more songs to songfight, and establish a presence in the archive, people go back and will listen to your old songs too. on average, it's probably not unusual to have someone that's been around and regularly contributes to have their music listened to a minimum of a thousand times a month.

that's right. a thousand times a month. this is why you should songfight. and songfight well. winning is nice but exposure is nicer. and having strange people in farway place become familiar with your music is the nicest.

[j$]

M'lud, Jack Shite is of course right, but is the right honorable old-timer aware that his explanation could actually be used as corroborary evidence on both sides of the "argument"?

Regardless, what it doesn't take into account is the peculiar thrill, no matter how many times you have or have not previously won, to see someone say they will vote for your song, and if on occasion you garner a few of these verbal rosettes, the shocking, slightly unpleasant, irrepressable, nagging, vainglorious doubt that you might actually win... the reverse of this, a slight bitter tone when reviews do not go your way, only serves to highlight the fact that, if nothing else, we are all ridiculously, amusingly, desperately competitive folk, whether we choose to be honest enough to admit it or not.

Why, even Mr Shite is 'guilty' of this strange habit and I point to his posted comments in the 'I Hope You're Okay' review thread as exhibits A through at least B.

No further questions, m'lud.



j$

[jack]

put it this way j$....it means more to me that you say like my song best here than if you actually vote for it. hands down. no competition. whether or not you or anyone else follows through, the fact you give it some form of vain validation for me is what gives me the chubby.

[j$]

Agreed. It's just weird that there is a little part of me, anyway, that gets all excited and kiddy-like when someone says 'vote for j$' that I might just win. It doesn't bother me that much, but obviously on a sub-conscious level, 'I would love it' if I won.

Then again, as anyone who has met me, I am generally 'all excited and kiddy-like' on most days anyway ....

j$