Voting Booths yet again

Sorry, but I felt this deserved it's own thread..

I want to look at a couple of facts - follow my train of thought please


1 - As per the new ruling - 1 voting booth per region.

2 - A cap placed upon voting booth payouts over all.

3 - People having voting booths in more than 1 region

4 - successful voting booths always making the lists..


Ok.. so lets see John Doe has 1 voting booth - he gets paid a percentage of the total booth payout based upon his number of votes..

Now.. Jane Doe has 6 booths - each in a seperate region. She gets paid a percentage of the total booth payout based upon her number of votes *for each booth*!!!!!!


Lindens, I know the system isnt perfect - but capping the voting booths IS NUTS!!!!

I mean seriously, are you *trying* to throw everyone in the poorhouse?

The fact is - unless you make it so that each person gets only 1 booth period, this just cant work. Not in a fair and equal manner. Even if you were to set it so that all booths report back to a single number that is paid out on (all booths combined make total votes for the night) it's going to be doing nothing but;

a) paying really only to people who are living close together and could get in on the land when it *was* availiable - since is sure the hell aint now.

b) paying out in the end on who is popular regardless of how cool their build is.


Lets face it - people put up booths on basically nothing - just to get the cash they need to build their projects. Do they deserve those votes? Hell no - but they get them because the community at large (and their friends in particular) want to see the project finished - want to encourage them. I dont think this a bad thing - but under the cap that is being propsed - it not's just bad, It's cheating and stealing from the other inhabitants.

I forsee this cap doing 2 things

1 - with less money coming in, taxes will be too high and people will sell back to what they can afford *and Horde* what they have. No new projects, can you say a static environment?

2 - with all the new people who show up, the amount is going to get smaller and smaller spread as it will be among their booths (or multiple booths) so once again we are back to the hording.

Take the proposed group sim idea.. if people dont have a way of getting the cash that voting booths offer - *Lindens* will *HAVE* to underwrite all new theme areas because no one else will be able to afford it.

Gee - -2000lb/week because of taxes on all my lands - good thing I make about 2500-3000 a week in votes. That will be a thing of the past. No one will own large amounts of land.

OK let me take that back - shops will bring in money, and they will do ok *BUT* They wont get one darn red cent from me!?!?!? why should I give them money for things when there is no way for me to get any back save by selling all my land and hoping that my rating/stipend kicks enough back each week?

that is pathetic

I think you were trying to be extreme but I like the idea of one voting booth account per person.

I know I changed the wording a little.

I think it would be good if each person could have as many booths as they want. As close together as they want. BUT each person can only vote for any one *person* once per day. If I vote on your 1st booth, clicking on your 2nd, 3rd, etc will say "You have already voted".

It is true, this moves the emphasis away from projects and to people. Instead of saying a project is cool you are saying a person is cool. I think this is ok because it is almost how it works now anyways. You vote at a project, but that just gives money to the person. They can spend it any way they please.

But what about my multiple projects? Shouldn't I be rewarded more for having more projects out there?

You will! More projects means more people pass by, visit or otherwise get a chance to vote for you. I think number of votes would go up, because I believe that when people have two voting booths on two projects it is not the same people voting at both. Sure there may be some overlap.

But I wanna know which projects are doing good!

There is no reason why the email (which I only get sporadically) that tells you how many votes you got couldn't also tell you which booths got which votes.

I don't mean to argue your points here..as they are certainly valid ones...but what if the stipends were dramatically increased to support large and expensive builds?

Wouldn't this allow people to do the things they want and self-support them without overly depending on the booths? If the Lindens are applying a bit of common sense, which I hope they are, they will make sure as much, if not more, money will flow into the system with the higher stipend rates.

In my opinion , the Lindens are trying to reduce the reliance on the booths, as many people have not been able to get into the action like with Lindenburg, or have been lucky enough to be very popular. Under the revamped stipend system, everyone would be able to self-support their builds, up to a certain extent (who knows what that level is..guess it depends on the overall resources of the servers.)

Perhaps the voting limits could be set to the average of the vote payout of the past month, so the drop-off wouldn't be too bad, which will pump more cash into the system overall.

*Hopefully* this will work out for the betterment of most people, most of the time....

J

I 'hate to say it' but I agree with Ama. The only detail I would point out is that these multiple booths that flow into one user account should NOT have the current 4 vote minimum to 'count'.

If the voting is for people as Ama suggests, then every vote cast should count. While we would loose the 'duplicate' votes from the current system, we would gain the votes that are otherwise lost when a booth is at less than the 4 vote minimum to 'register'.

Of course this all should be balanced with whatever other economic changes the Lindens are going to do to adjust the economy. But I would hope that any changes made, still encourage 'investment' rather than hoarding as Jax is worried about.

- Mickey

Raising the stipend sounds like a good idea...

save for this


if they are trying to fix the economy by fixing the money paid out in votes

yet they are raising the stipend to compensate for the loss of money in votes

then they really havent fixed the economy at all.

Depends on what you think is broken with it.

Even if the money entering the world is the same, such a change as you describe would lessen people's dependance on voting booths. That is a change to the economy. And it may help.

well look at it this way...

someone said they wanted to drop the cap on voting payouts to

10,000.

and that one of the last voting payouts was

17,000.

so they save 7k

but if they have to boost the stipend for everyone to compensate by say..

300

with a pop of well over 1500 people

thats 4500 extra dollars each week

now... 300 really wont make a dent at all. for many that's one day's votes - and only 20% of their tax

so if they wanted it to really make a difference...
say 600

now your looking at

9000 - which is 2k more than they were paying out in votes.

and that doesnt take into account all the new people coming in.

Jax, if they really wanted to "fix" the economy, the Lindens would give us all 10k a week, regardless of ratings, taxes, builds, etc. But the the servers would surly crash under the weight of all those builds...(but it'd fun while it lasted...lol)

It is my sincere hope the the Lindens will add more funds to the economy overall, and it do it in a way that will encourage building and doing stuff...that's the one of the things about beta...this whole thing is just one big experiment to see what works best. If the new scheme falls flat on its face, I'm sure they will reverse it very quickly, as the Lindens really want the SL community to be a smashing success, as their eventual bottom line depends on it.

Just trying to inject a bit of healthy optimism into this thread...

K

optimism? bah

now you've gone and spoiled my funk!!!


grrr arrrgghhh oh look daiseys!!!! *skip skip skip*

Someone's not using a calculator.. the increase is a whopping
$450,000 Linden bucks.

So I don't think they'll be stimulating the general economy by THAT much. IF so, the 'lousey' $17,000 in daily vote dollars is chump change.

- Mickey

Bah! Doh! Duh! Eerk! Gaaa! Ding! Hrumph!

lol thanks Mickey. My brain works goodly

And thanks for reinforcing my point

Ok (with Nods to Ama - thank you Ama)

So far from this board, and 2ndlife chat I found this to be the easiest and most elegant solution..


- Set it so all booths report back to one single source for that person and all the votes are tallied together to create one overall vote result for that person.

- Set it so that you can only vote for an individual one time in any given day.


This would allow people to place multiple booths wherever they liked, to attract a large variety of people, and yet at the same time make sure to place a limit on the amount of vote-mining that can be done. It would also place that person's total votes as an overall score for all the combined builds they have - giving them a rating not based only upon a single build, but on their abilities overall.

By doing this - and therefore removing the redundant payout - it would be possible to run the voting booths without a cap on payouts and still keep the system to a more even keel.

thoughts?

I really like it.

I have heard mention of moving booths to the back ground of ranks and I much prefer this method instead. Why? Because booths are a more dynamic and fluctuating way of assigning money. For some reason I prefer that to the Rating system. Maybe because someone who hosts a great event gets more money for that event, but not every week for the rest of their SL lives as rating does. Although that logic is kinda screwed cuz I generally rate positively good hosts or hostesses at events. But I digress, you play Sorry, I play Chess ... er....

Anyways... yeah I like it.

Heya,, I have an idea,,,

Instead of gripping & moaning & whinning & stuff about people having more than 1 booth per sim, the lindens putting a cap on earnings from voting booths,, and general precieved unfairnesses... why not try this???

BE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR OWN VOTING HABITS

Something most people here seem to B overlooking. Sure it's easire to sluff the responsibility off on the Lindens, but How could it possibly B unfair if you don't let it B??? If U come up to a structure with more than 1 booth on it,, take the extra few seconds out to hover the cursor over the booth & find out if they are Ndeed owned by the same person. Or just do like me,, click on them both and B on your merry little way. if you're worried about Joe Cakehole getting more money that you Petition the lindens to put a vote cap = to the number of registered users in SL,, then AT MOST every one will receive 1 vote from everyone else.

To me, the voting booths are only about money,, same with the ratings system, if I see a booth I will hit it, weather it's the govoner's mansion, or Nate007's vacant lot. When I meet someone I rate them positive in all catagories, and if they turn out to B not my cup of tea *COUGHRIVNAHEM* I don't change thier ratings cause we ALL need money, the more the better, and to not vote, to rate poorly, and to cap the limits is to hurt the economy ( and the negative rating is kinda petty too IMO).

So why not just watch what U click on, & let the lindens focus there efforts on far more important things like,,,, Sub object tools, Making scripts more sim friendly, streamlining stuff so there is less issues with lag, New & inventive ways for people to make serious money,, not the nickel & dime shiznit U get from voting booths & Ratings , MAN ALIVE,, the list goes ON!

What was this all about??? let me reitterate for folkz who forgot their Ridlen (sp?)

BE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR OWN VOTING HABITS

& drop al this namby-pamby socallist whiney crap

A copy of this message wil be posted under #!'s thread "warning: rant about voting booths " as well.

Thx for your time

Ok, ya vote for everyone, ya rate everyone, The Lindens shell out the big bucks.

And the economy goes even deeper into the crapper.


As a point - I was told today that some of the new arrivals (relatively new) got a whopping $2 dollars for their stipend.

Hell I went down from 500 to 120 in stipend - and from 800 to 305 in Rating Bonus (even if my rating went up over 20 points).

So.. rate away, vote away - and watch it just fall apart. Being reponsible isnt enough. We dont ask for a cap - we're trying to find ways to *avoid* a cap.

Big difference.


And as a note... if everyone was responsible in their rating/voting practices WE WOULDNT HAVE THIS PROBLEM.

but people are people - abusers are abusers - miners are miners, and in the end it *is* the Lindens who have to fix it - with as much help from us as we can give.

Z has a piont and i agree with it as much as it pains me to do so..lol...i still agree that some measures should taken so that one voting booth per person per build should put into play for those who choose to abuse the system but hes right.. we've been discussing this issue all day and this is the first time someone has said well if you see just vote on one(wish i had thought of it) but today in world thats just what i did do... i checked to see if the booths were owned by the same person and if they were i only voted on one.. since the booths seemed to be such an heated issuse i decided to not be one of the ones who contributes to the problem and i'm not trying to make myself sound any better here than anyone else . i've gone by a number of times in my travels and just clicked on both*smacks myself on the hand* but maybe if everyone just took a few seconds the double names on the list would be for those who have more than one structure and not those we have 2 booths side by side.

What R U talking about Senator?!? It's not like there is only so much money in SL... it's all little 1's & 0's,, an endless supply of electrons, Any breakdowns in the system,, just like in real life are government subsedised(sp?)

You are right " He who worships vile darkness between the stars"

but....

The Lindens are assigning those 1's & 0's values so as to restrict the load on the servers. i.e. if you can't afford to build huge monstrosities (AHEM*KOFF*DANTES*KOFF*) every 20 feet, then you stand a better chance of not crashing the sims.

So that in mind - the lil bytes DO have value. And as such, need to be regulated. Now I dont mind this, what I do mind is regulation to the point of strangulation.

read in to that.. "I want the economy fixed, but dont touch *MY* pocket book" *winks*

seriously though - It does need to be fixed. But in a sensible way that still allows for expressing admiration for anothers works. Cap the voting payoff - and you kill revenue - give more in stipend - and you end up paying out obscene amounts more than the voting was offering in the first place.

if the economy is a toilet - that idea just pulled the lever "Flush".

Jax sez-Cap the voting payoff - and you kill revenue -

Zoli sez-Ok,, full on-

Jax sez-give more in stipend - and you end up paying out obscene amounts more than the voting was offering in the first place. -

Zoli sez-What U smoking in that pipe O urz , Senator?!? U make it out like the economy is backed with gold,, which I don't even think ours is anymore.-

Jax sez-The Lindens are assigning those 1's & 0's values so as to restrict the load on the servers-

Zoli sez-Which is silly when U can put a poly cap on the sims to prevent that problem,,, which could also be solved in a more timely manner if they wern't waisting time with the frickin voting booth snakebite scare. * nods meaningfully*-