Rules and scoring thread

[Steve O]

@hozn 168983 wrote:

Maybe rule details need a new thread.

Here it is, and here’s hozn’s post that reflects my thinking as well:
@hozn 168895 wrote:

I think one could pretty easily argue against a points system that simply rewards based on mileage (and some bonus for daily participation). This make it hard for folks who don’t have the luxury of being able to spend 4 hours a day on their bikes to ever hope to compete in the points competition. I think adding a social component to scoring could make it competitive to a much larger group and keep the competition more dynamic. I liked some ideas thrown out earlier (perhaps last year) about having bonus points based on winning some of the ongoing pointless prize competitions too, not sure how exactly that gets managed technically, but anything to keep the competition open seems like it would be an improvement.

Topic

[streetsmarts]

@dkel 169166 wrote:

It’s decided: I am so not signing up for this this year.

bummer. hey…set up a coffee or beer ride in the cold months and I’ll show up. I just like nice people who ride bikea! !

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Judd]

@streetsmarts 169167 wrote:

bummer. hey…set up a coffee or beer ride in the cold months and I’ll show up. I just like nice people who ride bikea! !

I’m working on a pointless prize where dkel wins by buying me lots of pancakes on MLK day.

[streetsmarts]

@Judd 169168 wrote:

I’m working on a pointless prize where dkel wins by buying me lots of pancakes on MLK day.

I have that day off and hope to a. get to eat pancakes at the new Mike’s and b. do a fun ride!!

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[ShawnoftheDread]

@Steve O 169149 wrote:

I’ve been giving some more thought to the Surowiecki System (S^2). Again, recognizing the potential technological constraints, a version of it could be used to create a completely democratized scoring system.

Essentially the participants themselves define the scoring system for themselves: no particular individuals, like me or hozn or jrenaut, have any more influence than anyone else. If you play the game, then you are the scoring system for the game.

How it works:
Each day you ride you get 100 points (or some value) that you then award to others (not on your team). The data about everyone’s riding is available, so if you think the riders who rode the farthest should get the most points, then they get them. If you like time better than miles, then those people. If you hear it snowed a lot in Germany, give more points to consularrider. If Sunyata visited 11 breweries in one day (!), then, dammit, she gets mine.

Because there are so many players, no one player can have much influence. If it turns out the vast majority of players like the simple days+miles, then that’s the way it will work out. If it turns out players like clever ride titles a lot, then that will play out in the scoring. If you learn someone is riding while sick and you think they deserve some bonus for that, then do it. Etcetera, etcetera. Your ability to influence the system is small, but not zero, and more if you ride on more days.

The scoring system IS the people who play the game. Instead of the Putin system where a top-down entity decides for us, it’s more an Athenian system of direct democracy. And it adapts as we go along. If the “crowd” senses the leaderboard is skewed, they will start reallocating their points so that it more closely comports with their sense of what it ought to be. After 78 days, the leaderboard will reflect almost exactly the cumulative preferences of the players. What could be better than that?

It completely eliminates the need to argue over a scoring system, because the scoring system itself embodies the discussion and gives each player an equal voice (weighted by daily participation). One might also think of it as a market-based system, where each player gets currency and you vote with your wallet.

And it completely eliminates the need to discuss the scoring system year to year. Each year the scoring system will reflect the preferences of that year’s players.

Out of all the discussions and suggestions in this thread and other related threads, this is by far the most ridiculous.

[dkel]

@Judd 169168 wrote:

I’m working on a pointless prize where dkel wins by buying me lots of pancakes on MLK day.

I’ll buy you pancakes on MLK day. No pointless prize required.

[cvcalhoun]

My own preference would be to keep the scoring the same as it was last year. I am particularly opposed to a social component. I am not even fond of a moving time component, although it would favor me. If we’re going to consider such things, as far as I’m concerned, it should be a beta test this year, and we see how they go.

However, whatever we are going to do, we should decide quickly. We’re up to 183 registrations already. If we’re fundamentally changing the scoring system, it may affect people’s desire to participate. The last thing I want to have to do is delete a bunch of people after they register.

[Judd]

@dkel 169173 wrote:

I’ll buy you pancakes on MLK day. No pointless prize required.

Everybody wins! I wish the logistics worked out that I could go to Mike’s other than Federal Holidays.

[aabaird]

@hozn 169073 wrote:

Yeah, I think the daily points system (DRASS) would be better.

Maybe @vvill has some suggestions on logarithmic scale for mileage; if I remember right there was an aspect of that in freeze points (?) I might not be remembering correctly, though.

Looking forward to the competition no matter the decisions on scoring!

[hozn]

Yeah, I think let’s get the social stuff worked out on the backend and have new proposed scoring system(s) for next year implemented as an alternative leaderboard this year. We need to decide on officially 2019 BAFS scoring before registration opens. Probably at the end of March is when we should do that.

I do think we’ll demote the individual leaderboards, though.

[musclys]

:confused::confused::confused:

[lordofthemark]

@LhasaCM 169155 wrote:

Setting aside any ideals or anything else with this (such as a potential tendency to either reward, or consciously not reward, people you already know on other teams): to me, this would make participating in the competition seem like a daily chore, and I’d opt out. (There’s probably a reason or two that the Athenian system of direct democracy gave way to representative democracy.)

This is precisely what I thought about this 1. Its way too much of a burden to think about everyone’s different activities each day and evaluate them 2. Its very likely to end up a popularity contest.

[Vicegrip]

@hozn 169178 wrote:

Yeah, I think let’s get the social stuff worked out on the backend and have new proposed scoring system(s) for next year implemented as an alternative leaderboard this year. We need to decide on officially 2019 BAFS scoring before registration opens. Probably at the end of March is when we should do that.

I do think we’ll demote the individual leaderboards, though.

I watched from the sidlines the first year and hopped on for the second. For me I like the basic clean formula of “Ride bike. Earn points”. The rest is good fun with charts and graphs and groups and donuts but it sidecar and I think should be elective. The twentyseven 8X10 color glossy photorgraphs with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one are fun and a good to have to enjoy if you want but… F.S. is at its core “Ride bike. Earn points”

[jrenaut]

@Vicegrip 169190 wrote:

Ride bike. Earn points

I just added this as a tagline to the front page of the website. You’ll be able to see it next time we push a round of changes.

[Steve O]

@ShawnoftheDread 169171 wrote:

Out of all the discussions and suggestions in this thread and other related threads, this is by far the most ridiculous.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]15816[/ATTACH]

[accordioneur]

@hozn 169178 wrote:

Yeah, I think let’s get the social stuff worked out on the backend and have new proposed scoring system(s) for next year implemented as an alternative leaderboard this year. We need to decide on officially 2019 BAFS scoring before registration opens. Probably at the end of March is when we should do that.

Excellent idea! Collecting the appropriate data will allow the community to assess the impacts of possible scoring changes. That way an informed decision can be made, rather than going with a last-minute, shoot-from-the-hip, bait-and-switch approach to evolving the game.

[Author]

Replies