Hmmmmmmmmm..
This could be interesting...
You have my vote for sure my friend. You hit the ground running when you joined 420 and haven't stopped yet!
420 Magazine's Member of the Month: February 2013
- Thread starter 420 Girl
- Start date
You have my vote for sure my friend. You hit the ground running when you joined 420 and haven't stopped yet!
Sorry to offend , like last month ( very Drunk last month
) always gets me in trouble. Was just joking last month and it went silly when others got involved. But drunk jokes don't always come across as a joke do they . I apologize, should of kept my opinions to myself.I didn't aim the "popularity contest at you , I just meant in general. It sort of has been for a long time in some of the MOTM Comps. Not all, it just went that way for a bit. Really wasn't aiming it at you and apologize if it seemed that way to you. Mate last year it defo was a popularity contest some months.
The reason you won last month or the month before was because you are a great grower and we all know and see this and you coco knowledge is spot on. I have defo learnt some things off you about coco and feeding the substrate. I will use this info next time I use coco.
I like the new syatem and think they are all more than deserving , except I myself cant comment on one of them as I havent met him on here yet. Probably not in the same style of growing as me so I probably just seen his pictures. But of who I know they are all some of the best on here.
Mine went to vick this month as he's is a great grower and is always helping and popping around all threads and very recently which to me deserves MOTM and looking at the way it is going most will agree.
Good luck everyone.
hello boys and girls.
i been away on a little vacation and i seem to have missed the rukkus =/
just want to add my 2 cents worth as im a real opinionated git as some of you well know
I like the new system, change is always bumpy. it has its flaws. i feel like a backseat passenger with this new system. it does feel a little like the difference between the peoples choice and the leadership owning the descision and we get to only choose from a set menu so to speak and i think this needs to be addressed.
we are still absent of that warm feeling we get when we can nominate someone and explain our reasons in public. i think a good middle ground is to have the staff posting nominees exactly as it is now, but to also allow us to nominate publically. it needs some work.
i also like the old system. and this idea that its a 'popularity' contest is a misnomer. to those that dont nominate someone in this contest, then come the 15th things are identical in both systems. they merely get served up a list of names and pick their choice.
changing the system has NOT effected who is likely to win based on any skill vs popularity basis. the only thing thats changed is the nomination proccess has gone behind closed doors.
i know we say this is to better help the unknowns get a shot, but take a look at a recent contest where i nominated sense amelia. right from the start it was statistically obvious that she wouldnt win. but merely being publically nominated got this fairly new and unknown member on the radar of a lot of people, her journal is a perfect example of a calm growing newbie and i bet more than a few panicking first timers that discovered the journal through looking at the motm contest will be growing right now with a little more peace of mind.
no, if there is a popularity part to the old system that needed to be changed and one thats still a vulnerability in the new system is that its possible for a nominee to 'work' in such a way as to alter the numbers.
a winner last year managed to go from a mediocre position to winning position by simply camping the newbie section offering quick and dirty cut and paste advice that wasnt always accurate or relevant to the poster who needed the advice
so what we see whole herds of newbies looking like 'deer in headlights' being timely 'reminded' to vote in motm, by the only person that has had the time to address their issue and only then as tactic to win .imho.
anyway point being. i think that some of the people that call this a popularity contest should really take a look at how much time and hard thinking that THEY put into making their choice. and that if we want it to be a fair and accurate system, we need to tighten up the ways that a nominee can change the outcome by sheer force of will.
i been away on a little vacation and i seem to have missed the rukkus =/
just want to add my 2 cents worth as im a real opinionated git as some of you well know
I like the new system, change is always bumpy. it has its flaws. i feel like a backseat passenger with this new system. it does feel a little like the difference between the peoples choice and the leadership owning the descision and we get to only choose from a set menu so to speak and i think this needs to be addressed.
we are still absent of that warm feeling we get when we can nominate someone and explain our reasons in public. i think a good middle ground is to have the staff posting nominees exactly as it is now, but to also allow us to nominate publically. it needs some work.
i also like the old system. and this idea that its a 'popularity' contest is a misnomer. to those that dont nominate someone in this contest, then come the 15th things are identical in both systems. they merely get served up a list of names and pick their choice.
changing the system has NOT effected who is likely to win based on any skill vs popularity basis. the only thing thats changed is the nomination proccess has gone behind closed doors.
i know we say this is to better help the unknowns get a shot, but take a look at a recent contest where i nominated sense amelia. right from the start it was statistically obvious that she wouldnt win. but merely being publically nominated got this fairly new and unknown member on the radar of a lot of people, her journal is a perfect example of a calm growing newbie and i bet more than a few panicking first timers that discovered the journal through looking at the motm contest will be growing right now with a little more peace of mind.
no, if there is a popularity part to the old system that needed to be changed and one thats still a vulnerability in the new system is that its possible for a nominee to 'work' in such a way as to alter the numbers.
a winner last year managed to go from a mediocre position to winning position by simply camping the newbie section offering quick and dirty cut and paste advice that wasnt always accurate or relevant to the poster who needed the advice
so what we see whole herds of newbies looking like 'deer in headlights' being timely 'reminded' to vote in motm, by the only person that has had the time to address their issue and only then as tactic to win .imho.
anyway point being. i think that some of the people that call this a popularity contest should really take a look at how much time and hard thinking that THEY put into making their choice. and that if we want it to be a fair and accurate system, we need to tighten up the ways that a nominee can change the outcome by sheer force of will.
I also have used the term popularity contest to describe the Member of the Month contest, but I don't mean it in a negative or disparaging way. It's inevitable that the most active, most communicative, most helpful members are going to be popular. This is a good thing in my opinion.
We're trying to introduce more of the members that may be lesser known, but high contributors, to the wider community. It's for the wider audience to form their own judgement.
I truly hope no one feels offended by anything thats been said in this regard.
Those of us in the back room, and some of our longer term members, remember the collusion a certain clique would perform to try to get their subgroup members the win each month. This led to our decision to temporarily suspend the contest until we sorted out the personnel problems. It's possible some people viewed this as a popularity contest during that period, but those of us with access to the "who voted" feature looked at this as "ballot stuffing". The people doing this were sanctioned or banned and the issue is in our rear view mirror, (albeit with improved checks we have in place to catch such behavior)
I wanted to explain my opinion in hope that it offered a different perspective to anyone thinking we were discouraging popularity
We're trying to introduce more of the members that may be lesser known, but high contributors, to the wider community. It's for the wider audience to form their own judgement.
I truly hope no one feels offended by anything thats been said in this regard.
Those of us in the back room, and some of our longer term members, remember the collusion a certain clique would perform to try to get their subgroup members the win each month. This led to our decision to temporarily suspend the contest until we sorted out the personnel problems. It's possible some people viewed this as a popularity contest during that period, but those of us with access to the "who voted" feature looked at this as "ballot stuffing". The people doing this were sanctioned or banned and the issue is in our rear view mirror, (albeit with improved checks we have in place to catch such behavior)
I wanted to explain my opinion in hope that it offered a different perspective to anyone thinking we were discouraging popularity
Ok, I just want to say for the record,
That in no way have I been trying to tip the scales in my favor since being nominated.
As I'm pretty sure that was directed at me..
It's pretty hard not to take that personally, after receiving so many votes this early..
You brought up many great points in your post Giga.
Are you saying, that for this new system to work, nominee's shouldn't be allowed to do what they normally do around here, for the duration of the contest? Just so they don't have a chance to "grease the wheel" so to speak?
I know this happens here, I've seen it..
But if that's what you think I'm doing? Or if anyone else thinks this too? I'd rather be withdrawn from the contest right now, and leave it up to these other 3 gents..
I'm not doing anything differently now, than I was 2 weeks ago @ 420.
Being nominated was a complete shock for me, as it probably was for a few of the other noms too.
I totally agree that it's going to need some work to get it working perfectly.
But I think it's definitely a step in the right direction.
I agree with a lot of what has been said this month for the new changes but also feel somewhat offended by some comments on here about popularity contests, winners and some other random comments made. I feel very honored to be a past winner and also have dedicated so much to this forum, that I felt blessed to be nominated and recognized for my participation in the best Marijuana forum ever. I chose this forum over others because of the overall collective knowledge available, the type of members here which are intelligent, kind, thoughtful and the best group of people who all share a common ground. I've visited other 'growing' forums out there and their full of rude, obnoxious people and incorrect information and that is why I love 420 Magazine because it is the exact opposite.
There is a lot of very valid opinions on here due to the changes, but this should be set in a separate thread, just like when the website changes occurred because it is taking away from the nominee's that deserve the attention of the forum because for many great reasons they are being honored for people that have put in a lot of time, effort, kindness, and knowledge for all of us to gain from.
I have had the opportunity to meet 3 of the 4 nominees and from the 3 I have met, they all are great individuals and very deserving of the recognition. They continue to give help to new and veteran members and participate with kindness, respect and good vibes which is the "standard" it seems here at 420 Magazine, the exact reason I joined
I truly believe that the new contest format should be discussed, but not in the place that we should be discussing the nominees and helping encourage them on. Lets start a separate thread for that purpose.
I just want to say Vick, Vape!! I very much value the friendship on this forum and I appreciate all of the compliments, help, encoragement and knowledge that you have helped me with on my grows here at 420.... Congrats on your nominations !!!
JJbones!! I have not had as much discussions with you in the past but I have managed to read a lot of the threads that you have posted and you are also definitely a very valuable member here at 420 magazine, and share tons of great information that I have absorbed in a great deal Congrats on your nomination!
OG1969... I congratulate you on your nomination as well. I haven't had the opportunity to really get to know you that well but now that you have been highlighted as a valued member, I definitely will be swinging by your journals to see what I am missing Congrats and look forward to getting to know you and your grows
Overall I am excited to see who wins this one!!! Great job everyone on making this the best 420 site period!!!
There is a lot of very valid opinions on here due to the changes, but this should be set in a separate thread, just like when the website changes occurred because it is taking away from the nominee's that deserve the attention of the forum because for many great reasons they are being honored for people that have put in a lot of time, effort, kindness, and knowledge for all of us to gain from.
I have had the opportunity to meet 3 of the 4 nominees and from the 3 I have met, they all are great individuals and very deserving of the recognition. They continue to give help to new and veteran members and participate with kindness, respect and good vibes which is the "standard" it seems here at 420 Magazine, the exact reason I joined
I truly believe that the new contest format should be discussed, but not in the place that we should be discussing the nominees and helping encourage them on. Lets start a separate thread for that purpose. I just want to say Vick, Vape!! I very much value the friendship on this forum and I appreciate all of the compliments, help, encoragement and knowledge that you have helped me with on my grows here at 420.... Congrats on your nominations !!!
JJbones!! I have not had as much discussions with you in the past but I have managed to read a lot of the threads that you have posted and you are also definitely a very valuable member here at 420 magazine, and share tons of great information that I have absorbed in a great deal
Congrats on your nomination! OG1969... I congratulate you on your nomination as well. I haven't had the opportunity to really get to know you that well but now that you have been highlighted as a valued member, I definitely will be swinging by your journals to see what I am missing
Congrats and look forward to getting to know you and your grows Overall I am excited to see who wins this one!!! Great job everyone on making this the best 420 site period!!!
I think maybe we smoke way too much ganja and a bit of paranoia is taking over threads. People thinking posts are aimed at them or whatever.
Ive had to explain myself a few times as what I have said has been taken out of context.
We are a family , I respect you all. Lets chill, I dont think anything is aimed at any one person. I cut the bud during week as it made me think too much. Cannabis 24/7 doesn't work well. If you have something to say say it and lets all stop being so sensitive. This is silly
Ive had to explain myself a few times as what I have said has been taken out of context.
We are a family , I respect you all. Lets chill, I dont think anything is aimed at any one person. I cut the bud during week as it made me think too much. Cannabis 24/7 doesn't work well. If you have something to say say it and lets all stop being so sensitive. This is silly
Very helpful and well written comment Soniq420
i think its fantastic that your willing to explain about your ability to monitor ballot stuffing, this is a key worry and brings reassurance and protection with regards to the 'clique's' you mentioned.
and how you mean popularity contest is the correct way for us to look at it i agree wholeheartedly. its a shame a few did mean it in a disparaging manner, its just a bit of passion on the old vs new systems.
vick
i would like to immediatly clarify that it was not directed at you, not in the least. 'i havnt even gotten round to checking out your 'track record' ive been very busy lately.
and i would also like to point out on the matter of
of course i agree with you that nominees should continue to behave exactly as they normally do..thats actually my point.
what i mean is when a members behaviour immediately and drastically changes in their activity levels that quickly return to normal after the votes been won...abnormal and unsporting behaviour.. im not really attacking anyone on the matter im just pointing out that some have been known to try and it IS possible to intentionally throw a vote that way. all im asking for is that the matter is brought to attention and factored into the structure of motm
i think its fantastic that your willing to explain about your ability to monitor ballot stuffing, this is a key worry and brings reassurance and protection with regards to the 'clique's' you mentioned.
and how you mean popularity contest is the correct way for us to look at it i agree wholeheartedly. its a shame a few did mean it in a disparaging manner, its just a bit of passion on the old vs new systems.
I also have used the term popularity contest to describe the Member of the Month contest, but I don't mean it in a negative or disparaging way. It's inevitable that the most active, most communicative, most helpful members are going to be popular. This is a good thing in my opinion.
We're trying to introduce more of the members that may be lesser known, but high contributors, to the wider community. It's for the wider audience to form their own judgement.
I truly hope no one feels offended by anything thats been said in this regard.
Those of us in the back room, and some of our longer term members, remember the collusion a certain clique would perform to try to get their subgroup members the win each month. This led to our decision to temporarily suspend the contest until we sorted out the personnel problems. It's possible some people viewed this as a popularity contest during that period, but those of us with access to the "who voted" feature looked at this as "ballot stuffing". The people doing this were sanctioned or banned and the issue is in our rear view mirror, (albeit with improved checks we have in place to catch such behavior)
I wanted to explain my opinion in hope that it offered a different perspective to anyone thinking we were discouraging popularity
vick
i would like to immediatly clarify that it was not directed at you, not in the least. 'i havnt even gotten round to checking out your 'track record' ive been very busy lately.
and i would also like to point out on the matter of
of course i agree with you that nominees should continue to behave exactly as they normally do..thats actually my point.
what i mean is when a members behaviour immediately and drastically changes in their activity levels that quickly return to normal after the votes been won...abnormal and unsporting behaviour.. im not really attacking anyone on the matter im just pointing out that some have been known to try and it IS possible to intentionally throw a vote that way. all im asking for is that the matter is brought to attention and factored into the structure of motm
oldman60
New Member
"what i mean is when a members behaviour immediately and drastically changes in their activity levels that quickly return to normal after the votes been won."
In my short time here I have notice a little of that every month. I suppose that is to be expected to some extent.
Obviously they saw a trend in the nominations that they wanted to change.
In my short time here I have notice a little of that every month. I suppose that is to be expected to some extent.
Obviously they saw a trend in the nominations that they wanted to change.
Very helpful and well written comment Soniq420
i think its fantastic that your willing to explain about your ability to monitor ballot stuffing, this is a key worry and brings reassurance and protection with regards to the 'clique's' you mentioned.
and how you mean popularity contest is the correct way for us to look at it i agree wholeheartedly. its a shame a few did mean it in a disparaging manner, its just a bit of passion on the old vs new systems.
vick
i would like to immediatly clarify that it was not directed at you, not in the least. 'i havnt even gotten round to checking out your 'track record' ive been very busy lately.
and i would also like to point out on the matter of
of course i agree with you that nominees should continue to behave exactly as they normally do..thats actually my point.
what i mean is when a members behaviour immediately and drastically changes in their activity levels that quickly return to normal after the votes been won...abnormal and unsporting behaviour.. im not really attacking anyone on the matter im just pointing out that some have been known to try and it IS possible to intentionally throw a vote that way. all im asking for is that the matter is brought to attention and factored into the structure of motm
Thanks for clearing that up Giga.
And I'm sorry that I took it personally.
I guess I just felt that the point you were making had a little to do with why I had so many votes in one day, and saw it as an attack.
It's very easy to mis-read information sometimes, and jump to conclusions. This I obviously did, and am not proud of.
The excitement obviously got the better of me for a minute.
But I'm also glad I got it off my chest nonetheless.
Things are groovy now.
It's a beautiful new day.
moving right along.
And Thank you Soniq420 for explaining the "popularity contest" so well.
I'm sure you've calmed down a lot of people by doing so, and hopefully Cultivator comes back after realizing that it wasn't meant as a
character assassination aimed at him personally.
northener
New Member
Vary well said Vick.
Perfect Sun LED
Well-Known Member
So this is what all the drama was about.
When ever humans vote for humans there will be biases. It is human nature. Cannot be avoided because we are not robots. Nonetheless, the nominees are all helpful people.
It would be near impossible for members to go, okay, I have these four people to vote on. I need to scientifically, without bias or emotional attachment, look at each of their contributions and somehow quantify them into numbers so that I can score each and choose the highest scoring member. First, I would need to come up with such a robot scoring system. No one is going to do that, so no matter how the contest is run, when people vote, they will do so with all their humaness in tact.
If we were all Spock from Star Trek, contest would be held much differently, and perhaps much more boringly, unless we were all super stoned versions of Spock. Can he even get stoned?
When ever humans vote for humans there will be biases. It is human nature. Cannot be avoided because we are not robots. Nonetheless, the nominees are all helpful people.
It would be near impossible for members to go, okay, I have these four people to vote on. I need to scientifically, without bias or emotional attachment, look at each of their contributions and somehow quantify them into numbers so that I can score each and choose the highest scoring member. First, I would need to come up with such a robot scoring system. No one is going to do that, so no matter how the contest is run, when people vote, they will do so with all their humaness in tact.
If we were all Spock from Star Trek, contest would be held much differently, and perhaps much more boringly, unless we were all super stoned versions of Spock. Can he even get stoned?
It's a little more complicated then that but i understand what you are saying. 420 is still the best forum out there. I just need some time away and what has happened just tipped the scales. You will never find any better people then there are here.
Wait no one voted yet????
38 votes so far. I this type of nomination system will require research by the voters to understand who and why they are voting for someone. A link to ,1 their profile, so we can look over the breadth, or 2, highlights of their "work" if you will, could go to speeding that process up. I am confident that we can work out the details together, and come up with something that will work for everyone.
38 votes so far. I this type of nomination system will require research by the voters to understand who and why they are voting for someone. A link to ,1 their profile, so we can look over the breadth, or 2, highlights of their "work" if you will, could go to speeding that process up. I am confident that we can work out the details together, and come up with something that will work for everyone.
That's a great suggestion. The way I see things with anything in life is if you're going to bitch about something at least have the decency to offer a suggestion for improvement.
Oh I didnt cast a vote yet so I couldnt see the other votes 
Ok my fault
Ok my fault
Oh I didnt cast a vote yet so I couldnt see the other votes
Ok my fault
We have it set up that way so there is no inadvertent subliminal influence
Perfect Sun LED
Well-Known Member
I didn't know there were contests until I saw it in signatures. I think whoever greeting me in the introduce your self thread said something about it, but most likely, like me, others don't really pay attention to that part yet.
Perhaps there would be voters if there was something on the home page about voting for member of the month and so on. "Make your vote count. Vote now" Have the vote now be a link to the contests.
Perhaps there would be voters if there was something on the home page about voting for member of the month and so on. "Make your vote count. Vote now" Have the vote now be a link to the contests.
I agree I think that would be a good idea. Possibly a banner or something that pops.