H. G. Muller wrote on Sat, Oct 21, 2023 02:31 PM EDT:
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 think self-voting should not count for anything as far as ranking is concerned. Counting it, even slightly, and with an unrelated penalty, would still encourage undesired behavior for some. It should solely be used for indicating to the user what the inventor considers the best games amongst his own.
Ideally the number of self votes should be a fraction like 25-33% of the inventor's games. But it would probably be also acceptable to ignore games that were not favorited at all, and let the script only consider the set of favorited variants. Perhaps the following should work: there can be two symbols printed with each variant in the favorites list, one meaning "inventor thinks this game is good", the other "inventor thinks this game is bad". If an inventor than self-votes for more than half of his games in the favorites list, the variants he voted for would remain unmarked, and the smaller number he did not vote for get the second marker. That should encourage excessive self-voting.
Indeed casting a single vote is suspect. I already suggested there might be a case for having the weights decrease for very small numbers of votes. Of course it doesn't really help against cheating; inventors could simply ask their friends to cast several votes. I guess no system can be resistent to such 'friendly cheating', for persons that have sufficiently many friends.
I think self-voting should not count for anything as far as ranking is concerned. Counting it, even slightly, and with an unrelated penalty, would still encourage undesired behavior for some. It should solely be used for indicating to the user what the inventor considers the best games amongst his own.
Ideally the number of self votes should be a fraction like 25-33% of the inventor's games. But it would probably be also acceptable to ignore games that were not favorited at all, and let the script only consider the set of favorited variants. Perhaps the following should work: there can be two symbols printed with each variant in the favorites list, one meaning "inventor thinks this game is good", the other "inventor thinks this game is bad". If an inventor than self-votes for more than half of his games in the favorites list, the variants he voted for would remain unmarked, and the smaller number he did not vote for get the second marker. That should encourage excessive self-voting.
Indeed casting a single vote is suspect. I already suggested there might be a case for having the weights decrease for very small numbers of votes. Of course it doesn't really help against cheating; inventors could simply ask their friends to cast several votes. I guess no system can be resistent to such 'friendly cheating', for persons that have sufficiently many friends.