Dukasaur wrote:As for you main point, I'm not sure. Do we reward volume of work, or accuracy? That is a question that planners struggle with in every field, and I think there's pros and cons either way. I think DoomYoshi's 2-tier point system is an inspired way to try to reward both. It may still need further tweaks as time goes on.
Well do you reward skill or spam? Quality or quantity? I would always go with the former of both options and I believe most others would as well, especially from concerns already expressed consistently throughout these challenges.
Of course it's a clear choice when you put it in those insulting terms. Who wants to be responsible for spam? But the people who do prefer that option might think of it in other terms. They might think that playing 1500 games on the same setting in a month requires qualities like perseverance, determination and hard work.
In real life, anyway, most people insist on getting paid for the quantity of their work rather than the quality. So it would seem reasonable that at least some
of those people would bring that attitude to their online existence as well, does it not?
As for the concerns expressed, they have obviously been listened to. There were a lot of people who thought it unfair that quantity was the only
way to win these challenges, which is why Doom changed the scoring system so that you could choose to be rewarded for either
quantity or quality, depending on your personal philosophy. You've won the right to be rewarded on your terms. Why is that not enough? Why do you want to take that privilege away from those who hold to the opposite philosophy?
E.M. Forster wrote:"No--oh no! I mean he may be, but it would be loathsome stiff. His brain is filled with the husks of books, culture--horrible; we want him to wash out his brain and go to the real thing. We want to show him how he may get upsides with life. As I said, either friends or the country, some"--she hesitated--"either some very dear person or some very dear place seems necessary to relieve life's daily grey, and to show that it is grey. If possible, one should have both."
Some of her words ran past Mr. Wilcox. He let them run past. Others he caught and criticized with admirable lucidity.
"Your mistake is this, and it is a very common mistake. This young bounder has a life of his own. What right have you to conclude it is an unsuccessful life, or, as you call it, 'grey'?"
"One minute. You know nothing about him. He probably has his own joys and interests--wife, children, snug little home. That's where we practical fellows"--he smiled--"are more tolerant than you intellectuals. We live and let live, and assume that things are jogging on fairly well elsewhere, and that the ordinary plain man may be trusted to look after his own affairs. I quite grant--I look at the faces of the clerks in my own office, and observe them to be dull, but I don't know what's going on beneath. So, by the way, with London. I have heard you rail against London, Miss Schlegel, and it seems a funny thing to say but I was very angry with you. What do you know about London? You only see civilization from the outside. I don't say in your case, but in too many cases that attitude leads to morbidity, discontent, and Socialism."
She admitted the strength of his position, though it undermined imagination. As he spoke, some outposts of poetry and perhaps of sympathy fell ruining, and she retreated to what she called her "second line"--to the special facts of the case.
"His wife is an old bore," she said simply. "He never came home last Saturday night because he wanted to be alone, and she thought he was with us."
Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
Balance personal rights with social duties.
Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.