care to give an example?

Yes, this is a re-post... But here's where it belongs, and hopefully it won't get buried under a pile of rubble like everything else in the Quiz topic does.

Ok, here's my suggestion, formulated over time as I've become more familiar with how the quiz system works as a whole.

a) Each question gets reviewed by 2 NA, 2 Euro and 1 International - simple majority rules. If one marks the answer as wrong or two mark it as ambiguous, the question is tossed immediately.

b) More Mods - Way more Mods

c) Questions get reviewed separately from the Hunt - so a wrong answer doesn't penalize a Mod 10%, and there is no 5 minute limit. Approved Moderators would access a separate screen (like a button in the Misc. tab) and be able to access the question queue that way. Therefore, when a Mod wants to answer questions, they can. When they don't, they won't.

d) Mods get 1/2 their level (rounded up) SE for each question they moderate - regardless of whether it's approved or rejected.

e) Space for comments on the question (so users can actually know why the question was rejected). A Mod rejecting a question MUST leave a comment.

f) The ability to make rudimentary spelling & grammar corrections. People should not be punished for simple "oops" typos, or for being English-second-language!!!

g) Anyone reaching the 10th level (or higher) can apply to be a Moderator, provided they are English-first-language (or at least very proficient).

h) Moderators who fail to achieve 60% (or a different number to be determined as we go along) "agreement" with their fellow Moderators will lose the opportunity to continue Mod'ing for 2 weeks, then 1 month, then permanently.


Left lots of space for people to comment as they see fit

Ok players, do you like or not those sugestions?
Game administrators: Are any of those suggestions possible to implement if they are popular?

Um I gotta ask how asking 'what does hot air do?' with the answer being 'rises' into the sky be marked as a bad question with Your answers are ambiguous or wrong to this question. I don't know how that's incorrect or a double meaning because it's pretty obvious with the other choices condenses (only happen in a container or something), stays the same (no one should pick that answer), and none of the above (again no one should pick that one). so how did my question be a bad question?

There is a separate thread for posting rejected questions, but you answered your own question on why it is ambiguous. Depending on the circumstances it can either rise or condense. Also, "none of the above" is not an acceptable choice.

Quote: Viridel - 2010.08.23. 18:32:45

Nobody has ANYTHING to say???

Quote: Viridel - 2010.08.23. 18:32:45

I'm all for it. I've proposed similar changes myself. However, it would require coding changes, and so is exceedingly unlikely to actually happen.

Quote: Viridel - 2010.08.23. 18:32:45

Probably not necessary without a).

Quote: Viridel - 2010.08.23. 18:32:45

I agree this would be an improvement, but probably a marginal one. And it involves coding.

Quote: Viridel - 2010.08.23. 18:32:45

Probably not necessary without a) and b).

Quote: Viridel - 2010.08.23. 18:32:45

I would love this. Again, I've made similar proposals. But again, it involves code changes.

Quote: Viridel - 2010.08.23. 18:32:45

I think this would be good. My understanding from the work I do, however, is that it is illegal in several European countries, though. You are allowed to delete user content (as long as you can always provide it on request), but you are never allowed to modify user content.

Quote: Viridel - 2010.08.23. 18:32:45

Goes along with b).

Quote: Viridel - 2010.08.23. 18:32:45

Goes along with a).

So, in summary, great ideas, but they'll never happen, because nobody is actually programming for this game anymore. (or so I believe)

Good ideas there Vidrial, I only see a problem with the English as 1st language part of g) 1st it's difficult to implement and 2nd it might work against the the whole point of your suggestion. To solve this I think it would suffice to have one of the evaluators of every question being native English speakers.

Btw. you having to repost this exposes a fundamental flaw in this forum system where only a select group can start new threads, good ideas and valid questions, etc. get buried under chaff.

Viridel, stop necroposting please.

Quote: Kethios - 2010.09.02. 07:45:06

instead of reprimanding him for reposting a list of old but very relevant and excellent suggestions, why dont you post as to why these have not only not been responded to by admin but why they werent implemnted long time ago when first posted.

there is no point to these forums if the people developing the game are not interested in whats being posted, to have the forum then ignore everything it just a big finger to the people that actualy use them for what we all think they are here for. To help improve game.

I wrote a question not too long ago to do with the lord of the rings facts, the answer which i gave for some reason has been marked as bad for apparently being "ambiguous". I do not understand this reply, as the answer which is correct according to research i have done is fact. If you could answer this post asap it would be appreciated, thanks

i asked: how many children did Johann Sebastian Bach have?

13
16
19
21

The question is valued as "Bad, incorrect question"!
Your answers are ambiguous or wrong to this question.

i read the entries in wikipedia and counted the children, so i don´t understant the rejection. (the count includes the children who died early or were stillborn and he was married 2 times). if you count there yourselves, you´ll see that the answer is correct. is there a possibility to "recall" the judgement?

if this is valued as "too special", then the questions about american football would too, because which europeans are into football as much as the americans? or the questions about american tv-shows....
"special knowledge" is no reason too for rejection, since there is always a possibility to find out in the net. and if you answered incorrect, you´ll see the correct answer and you can learn a bit.

i´m really disappointed that the quiz-system is too "usa-loaded"

Dear Dimos,

first of all I have to inform you that informations provided by wikipedia can be wrong therefore it can not be used as a source to prove that answer to your question is correct. Secondly it is impossible to establish the number of children concieved by Johann Sebastian Bach for few reasons, the most important of them is: it is impossible to establish the number of females that had a sexual intercorse with Johann Sebastian Bach during his adult life. He could have any number of children and a situation when he did not confirm his parenthood to some of them is highly possible.
You could possibly change the question to: how many officially recognised children did Johann Sebastian Bach have? But in my humble opinion it is just a not interesting lexical knowledge and will be evaluated as bad question anyway.

Dimos already posted about this in the other section, but you're right as well.

According to wiki and wiki answers he had 20 in total (both wives and deceased). Thus, the answers provided by Dimos are incorrect.

i´m really disappointed that the quiz-system is too "usa-loaded"


oh really...and you see I see it as the other way around....I must have some european person somewhere that knows nothing about anything outside of europe evaluationg my questions.

I've bloody had it with this quiz bullshit...it could be an enjoyable part of the game but these evaluators are absolute crap and they can all go to hell.

This is the latest question that was rejected because only a special group might now the answer.

How did the Union ship " Minnesota" sink in October of 1861?


if these dumbass evaluators were to GOOGLE this question they would see that the answer is more or less right there....so tell me how this can be a "special group" question.?

idiots......I'm bloody done.....I've had it with their stupid shit!

can you mods tell the frustration level here??? or do you guys need a map for that too?

Quote: stekkos - 2010.08.23. 20:08:55

I think there are a hella good ideas there


something needs to be done about these evaluators....they SUCK!

As evaluators we have to follow the admins rules, we cannot change the way we evaluate if they do not agree even if we want to. My post that you quoted was never answered by admin. But since it came up again i will give it another try.

Quote: stekkos - 2011.02.16. 06:03:28

Stekkos why can't you be an admin.....I'd stand behind you!.....you seem to be one of the few that comes on here that makes any kind of sense and one of the few that has any common sense....

If you and a few others here were running things...this game would rock!

and my comments are not directed at you, I want you to know that....I make them in hopes that the powers that be will finally get it. I know you do your best.....I've seen it many times....and we do appreciate your efforts Stekkos

You questions is, why we do not implement Viridiel's suggestions on the quiz evaluation system.

Well, most of these suggestion are unnecessary complications, and are based on the assumption that the current quiz admins are inadequate for this job. This assumption in itself is quite insulting. You should be aware that Viridiel from the very first moment is contiinually insulting admins, often with an intolerable tone, whenever one of his questions are rejected (rightfully, I have to confirm).

Judging and evaluation happens based on a strict evaluation codex, you can read most of it under Quiz yourself. Of course, there are still cases when a subjective decision hav to be made. Whenever a soccer judge makes a call some people might not like it, but that doesn't mean he have to be replaced by a complete jury of judges from every country who must make a vote in every case. This is the system, these are the rules. You can rely on that if your question is good, it is very likely that it will be accepted.

Whenever a question gets rejected, it would be good if you could get an explanation - but this would be so much extra work, it would be downright impossible. Most of the time you can figure from the standard explanation anyway. Allowing thru questions which only have "minor" spelling errors - well, this would be downright stupid. People take no loss in case of spelling errors, they can correct those and resubmit the question without a penalty. Asking admins to accept wrong questions and correct them instead of rejecting them is the same impossible like writing detailed explanation.

Quote: Miklos - 2011.02.25. 14:17:51

Viridel is not the only person who has made suggestions.

Quote: Miklos - 2011.02.25. 14:17:51

OK. If most of them are unnecessary, how about commenting on the others?

Quote: Miklos - 2011.02.25. 14:17:51

In other words, the way it is now is perfect and can't be improved, so why should we have any discussion about ways to improve it?

Quote: Miklos - 2011.02.25. 14:17:51

First, we should be careful about terminology. As far as I know, there is currently 1 admin and 4 evaluators. The evaluators are the ones who are responsible for doing the accepting and rejecting of questions, so I think the suggestion would be for the evaluators to do the correcting as well. If the only objection to that is workload on the evaluators, that's easy to solve by expanding the pool of evaluators. There are plenty more volunteers. But that's just one minor suggestion. If we do have a conversation about how to improve the quiz system, it would be far down my list.