If we don't want self voting, we can just forbid it
I never said anything against self-voting. My issue is with mass self-voting, and forbidding self-voting is not the solution to that. That's why I suggested penalizing excessive self-voting.
But self voting can be useful, because inventors presumably know their own inventions better than anyone else, and can indicate to others what they feel are their best designs that way.
Indeed. That's why I allow it.
But that purpose would be completely defeated if inventors are encouraged to vote for all their inventions. So we should not encourage that by making it a good way to get those closer to the top of the list. A modest amount of self votes is very helpful, voting for all is as useless as voting for none.
Yes, exactly.
There should not be any penalty for the desired behavior.
I'm now thinking that the value of a self-vote should be influenced by how many self-votes someone has cast compared to how many games he has. If someone favorites all his games, his self-votes should count for nothing. If he favorites only a few, and he has invented many more games, each may count as a full vote. In between, there could be some attenuation for excessive self-voting. It's a matter of deciding what the limits should be and creating a formula.
I never said anything against self-voting. My issue is with mass self-voting, and forbidding self-voting is not the solution to that. That's why I suggested penalizing excessive self-voting.
Indeed. That's why I allow it.
Yes, exactly.
I'm now thinking that the value of a self-vote should be influenced by how many self-votes someone has cast compared to how many games he has. If someone favorites all his games, his self-votes should count for nothing. If he favorites only a few, and he has invented many more games, each may count as a full vote. In between, there could be some attenuation for excessive self-voting. It's a matter of deciding what the limits should be and creating a formula.