Game Mode Voting: Vote counts are invisible

[Guest]

So, we've had issues for a while (ranging from minor to mild) with vote hopping as well as the whole groupthink effect that comes with voting. What I saw today was cult and extended butting heads a bit with secret being an irrelevant majority. Someone from secret moved to cult, outnumbering extended by 1. Everyone on extended (save for 2-3) ganged up on secret and rendered cult's attempt at getting voted null.

A lot of this is because people can actually see how many people are voting for what. My suggestion: Annihilate the fact that people can even view what people are voting for what. Exceptions being moderators or admins.

Thoughts?

[Frances]

A big part of voting for a singular gamemode is being able to see you're coordinating your votes with other people in an attempt to achieve something.

If votes are hidden, the only roundtypes that will ever get selected anymore will be extended and secret.

[VoltageHero]

Agreeing with this.

A ways back, this was used, and I thought it went pretty well. Don't know why it was changed back, so if it has a big issue, point it out please.

As stated in Delta's post, you'll get people all grouping up on the largest voted item, or switching over at the last second, because they see a tie.

If you couldn't see how many people were voting for what, you'd be voting what you actually wanted, and not voting for something because everybody else was.

[Killerhurtz]

I approve - and because people don't know how many votes each has, it also means that "strategic voting" will also be mitigated - everyone will vote for what they truly want, and that may show a resurgence of less-used gamemodes (and a lesser use of secret).

And Frances, I don't see that being a problem. And the coordination part is actually a problem that was stated and that we're suggesting to fix.

[Frances]

That'd basically turn the voting system into a secret/extended switch. Just to make things clear.

Not saying whether this is good or bad, but I want everyone to be sure of what we're agreeing/disagreeing on.

[VoltageHero]

That'd basically turn the voting system into a secret/extended switch. Just to make things clear.

Not saying whether this is good or bad, but I want everyone to be sure of what we're agreeing/disagreeing on.

 

No, not really.

If anything, it'd get Secret voted more often, although it already is one of the most played modes (which isn't a bad thing). I highly doubt it would get extended voted more often.

[Guest]

A big part of voting for a singular gamemode is being able to see you're coordinating your votes with other people in an attempt to achieve something.

If votes are hidden, the only roundtypes that will ever get selected anymore will be extended and secret.

 

this also accounts into the typical goal of strategic voting. it works two ways.

one, that this mode must be picked. we must all pick this game mode.

two, that any game mode we think is downright awful, we must prevent that game mode from getting voted at any cost, even if it means voting another game mode we don't hate.

this is a very toxic way to deal with this and it's not cool at all when it's done.

[Frances]

I just don't see how any other gamemode will be voted in besides secret or extended.

People default to secret or extended depending on if they want action or not. But although a few hopefuls might start voting for another gamemode, the sole reason why any other gamemode gets picked is because other people see the specific mode has gotten a few votes already, and they coordinate into voting it higher.

You would never see modes such as nuke, cult, wizard or mutiny get picked through blind voting, simply because people wouldn't know which to vote for.

[Blue]

Gonna go against this.

There are some gamemodes that most of us hate. Yes, we know. "This is a server where we do all the gamemodes and you should like them all!" Except, we hate certain ones, and would rather pick the lesser of two evils sometimes.

I hate cult. I love extended. If it's clear extended won't win, but if cult does, I'm going to vote against it if I can. Secret is the result. Nothing bad, really. It's just the way democracy works.

Plus, if the players wanted cult, they would be voting it in instead of trying to vote it out. Just using cult as an example. Let the collective decide what they want and what they don't.

[Guest]

That same collective often likes to, while not outright breaking any rules, decide to be unsportsmanlike and not let the clearly winning game mode, go through.

I might actually suggest something else to follow this up if this isn't well-received.

[Blue]

If it was "clearly winning", it would have stayed winning.

[Guest]

The fact that people can change their vote just to make sure a certain game mode loses and another one wins over it is rather stupid.

Am I wrong in saying this?

[Blue]

If I don't wanna play X, I shouldn't be scrutinized for supporting Y. Democracy works both ways.

[Guest]

This has been discussed before and denied for reasons posted above.

This is Majority voting working in action. If the Majority don't want to play nuke they will jump to X gamemode that they are willing to play.

Option 1: got 3

Option 2: got 6

Option 3: got 4

Option 4: got 2

Option 5: got 1

Although option 2 got 6 votes, the majority doesn't want Option 2 (The majority being a collection of 10 people V 6) so they are free to change their vote to something that will win.

Honestly I find the people who don't ready up so they can avoid certain gamemodes then join right after the round has started a problem.

If it's secret and they don't ready up then less gamemodes are selected. Or on Nuke, only 16 people ready up, 3 of those people get taken for NukeOp the rest get shoved on station (Why only 3 NukeOps? Because balance reasons) Then all the people who didn't ready up join and you suddenly have 3 NukeOp V 30 crew + ERT +(Other NukeOp's if someone wants to be a dick) rather than 3 V 13.

It was also mentioned in this thread.

http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=1288&start=10#p11903

[LordFowl]

Another problem is people that just don't vote. It's hard to gauge what the 'majority' believe, when a large percentage of people maintain absolute neutrality. (Or worse don't vote but still rage against what was selected and don't ready up because of it.)

Also, amusing that in the thread Sound linked, 1138 brought up the nature of majority, and then two months later posts a duplicate thread.

[Prospekt]

I'd love to see, secret containing every game mode possibility when voted for. Instead of just extended, wizard, traitor, changling, etc. Secret is basically randomizing all of the gamemodes or should be. You are technically voting for a randomized gamemode which is secret to you so you don't know it. It'd be nice to include nuke ops and everything else in it so you actually don't know if a nuke ops is coming or if there is a cult or if there is a ninja, etc.

[Vittorio Giurifiglio]

Preferential Voting is more Democratic then what you are suggesting, Being able to vote for your second choice is better.

[Frances]

I'd love to see, secret containing every game mode possibility when voted for. Instead of just extended, wizard, traitor, changling, etc. Secret is basically randomizing all of the gamemodes or should be. You are technically voting for a randomized gamemode which is secret to you so you don't know it. It'd be nice to include nuke ops and everything else in it so you actually don't know if a nuke ops is coming or if there is a cult or if there is a ninja, etc.

Nuke Ops is actually in secret, but it requires a certain amount of people to ready for it to enter the rotation - and it rarely happens because people tend not to ready at the start of a secret round, but wait to see who joins. I can't find the secret roundtype code, but I believe you need either 15 or 25 players to ready up in order to access all the possible gamemodes of the rotation.

As for ninja, it's not in it because it used to be buggy, and is also considered to be a notch under all the other gamemodes as far as popularity is concerned.

[Guest]

For nuke it's 15 to have it if it's voted for and 25 to get it in secret.

[Erik Tiber]

A big part of voting for a singular gamemode is being able to see you're coordinating your votes with other people in an attempt to achieve something.

If votes are hidden, the only roundtypes that will ever get selected anymore will be extended and secret.

 

this also accounts into the typical goal of strategic voting. it works two ways.

one, that this mode must be picked. we must all pick this game mode.

two, that any game mode we think is downright awful, we must prevent that game mode from getting voted at any cost, even if it means voting another game mode we don't hate.

this is a very toxic way to deal with this and it's not cool at all when it's done.

It's a natural byproduct of a first-past-the-post system. Strategic voting is a symptom, not the disease, and even as a 'symptom' it is necessary. If you prevent strategic voting then the results will be even less representative of what people want.

Preferential Voting is more Democratic then what you are suggesting, Being able to vote for your second choice is better.

This. So much this.

If you want to improve voting, then you would have a runoff election. 40 seconds for one vote, then 20 seconds to vote between the top four choices. I'm not sure if the alternative vote would be easy enough to program.

[Skull132]

One fact to keep in mind is that for something like this, there is no "best" solution, and sometimes there isn't even a better solution. Just alternatives.

At that point, there really isn't any point in going super complex to appease some intangible idea of democracy. You instead simply operate of off the K.I.S.S. principle.

Cause, yeah, we aren't running a state here. We are instead voting for a gamemode on a game about 2d spessmens. Oh, and the caveat to this is that having "Secret" be an option is actually the least democratic thing we could do. As the parametres for that are set by coders, and chances weighed by either me or Scopes - the people who have access to the configuration files.

[Erik Tiber]

One fact to keep in mind is that for something like this, there is no "best" solution, and sometimes there isn't even a better solution. Just alternatives.

At that point, there really isn't any point in going super complex to appease some intangible idea of democracy. You instead simply operate of off the K.I.S.S. principle.

Cause, yeah, we aren't running a state here. We are instead voting for a gamemode on a game about 2d spessmens. Oh, and the caveat to this is that having "Secret" be an option is actually the least democratic thing we could do. As the parametres for that are set by coders, and chances weighed by either me or Scopes - the people who have access to the configuration files.

Well, if people want to vote to abdicate their right to vote to a random number generator, they can be my guest .

I'd think that we should instead try to make gamemodes reflect consensus. Minority gamemodes would ideally be played in proportion to their popularity, rather than not at all.

[Jamini]

Having seen secret votes in action: It mostly results in extended or secret. Virtually never with any other mode.

Personally, I'll admit to being a very consistent votehopper. Why? One simple reason:

-There exists a fairly large minority of players who will, intentionally or not, attempt to keep the votes "even" through some misguided notion of "fairness". This happens very, very often. Otherwise votehopping simply would not be an issue as there would be a clear majority winning gamemode most of the time. As long as there are people actively attempting to "even up" the votes" I will intentionally vote against my own desires until the last few seconds, and then swap.

In truth, I am not changing which mode I want to play. I am simply preventing an imbalance caused by another form of dishonest voting methodology. I'm sure a few of you will say I fight fire with fire, but be it as it may, that is my reason for hopping. As long as it remains possible, I will do as such to help ensure that I can play a game mode I wish to play, or avoid playing a game-mode I do not wish to play.

If you want to stop vote-hoppers, stack one game mode so their vote doesn't change anything. It is that simple.