Go to the NEW FORUM
Obviously, if I run a third Moderate game it won't be until the current slew of games are all over. (Although I was thinking of a short 'Best Moderate Songs of 2011' at the end of the year).
Here I have some thoughts on format changes to increase participation and decrease duration.
In the first round, there are eight albums to vote on per week. Instead of voting for them head to head, you're ranking all of them that you've heard.
Then, each of the albums of the week are compared head to head with each other album. The album that is ranked higher on the most lists that include them both is the winner of that matchup. 1.0 points for a win, 0.5 points for a tie, 0 points for a loss, and the two albums with the most points advance to the elimination draw.
This way, people have to do less listening to participate, but your vote still doesn't hurt the albums you haven't heard. Also, the second round is eliminated, and it goes straight from 128 to 32, knocking eight weeks off the total duration.
What do people think?
Also, I'm mulling a rule that you can't nominate albums by artists in the AM top 100, but I'm concerned that would decrease participation too much.
Instead of going with the top 100, maybe the top 50?
Here are my thoughts concerning the next Moderate Competition (all assuming everyone’s okay with me taking this over)-
While I’m intrigued by the “8 albums ranked per week” concept, I think I’d rather avoid that in my first go-around, and stick with the bracket format used in the previous Moderately Acclaimed (MA) competitions.
I’d like the group’s opinion on whether albums should be ineligible based on the ranking of their artists. If we do this, what should the cut-off be (top 100 artists? Top 50 artists? Something else?)?
Also, I’d like to gradually let some of the albums from previous competitions back in. My idea is that for the next competition, no albums from MA2 will be eligible, and the only albums from MA1 that will be eligible are those that were eliminated in Round One of that competition. These of course must also adhere to any artist restriction as noted above, if applicable. For example “Give Up” by Postal Service may be eligible while “Magical Mystery Tour” might not if we choose an artist restriction. (In a hypothetical MA4, no albums from MA3 would be eligible, only first round knockouts from MA2 would be eligible, and both first and second round knockouts from MA1 would be eligible, and so on).
I’d like to use the same methodology in choosing albums that BillAdama instituted in MA2- that is, entrants submit a list of ten nominations and I will go through all the first round choices, then second, then third, etc., with the following limits:
“No more than 25 will be picked ranked 1000 or higher, no more than 50 ranked 1500 or higher, no more than 75 ranked 2000 or higher, and no more than 100 ranked 2500 or higher, so make sure you spread your picks out through the entire list. If after one week the draw is not filled, there'll be a first come-first serve round posted on the forum.”
No one person can nominate more than one album by the same artist.
The result will be a draw of 128 albums eligible for the tournament.
One other thought – is there room in this competition for albums with NO acclaim (not even bubbling?)? Or should that be kept separate? (I only ask because several of my all-time favorites are nowhere to be found on AM, but I’m fine either way).
Timing-wise, I’d like to continue to get your thoughts and firm up the rules until the next site update goes in (November?), after which everyone will have a two-week period to submit their nominations. I’m hoping to announce the final bracket by mid –December, then start Round One in the first week of February 2012.
So please let me know what you think. We have a while to hash this out, but your input is invaluable.
(it's my tagline, yo)
I could go either way on letting unacclaimed albums in. The only reason they were not eligible in the first bracket is that we had a series of nomination weeks instead of letting people nominate directly. The only advantage I can see for not letting unacclaimed albums in is that it results in a less overwhelming range of choices.
I also agree with gradually letting albums from previous brackets back in.
All I have to add is that I think next time around divisions should be done by AM rank, so the more acclaimed albums are all against each other and the less acclaimed albums are all against each other. This makes it so albums people have already heard are more likely to be against other albums people have already heard, and albums people haven't heard are more likely to be against albums people haven't heard, which both increases participation and makes the competition more fair.
I figured I'd revive this before it fades to page 2...
As of now, my intention is to allow NON-acclaimed albums into the competition, but limit it to one NON-acclaimed album per person.
Additionally, I'll move forward with the plan to let first round-eliminated albums from the original match-up back in, provided they are not subject to any artist restriction we may impose.
Which leads me to the still-open question of where (if any) the cutoff for top artist ineligibility should be. Probably between 0 and 100, but I'm hoping for more feedback to finalize.
Finally, to BillAdama's point, I will base divisions on AM rank for the purposes he points out above.
In general, are folks still interested in this competition? I'll need at least 10 nomination lists once we get underway.
There are generally a lot more nomination lists than voters. Moonbeam, for instance, is a big example of somebody who will definitely nominate but does not usually vote.