"120 artists. And it’s not the same artist repeating in every festival. We have six Elemental flights from memory, So that would 720 entries at minimum." Sorry, what do you mean here by six elemental flights?
"Like slowly think about it what is the statistical probability that one slot will always be won by (user)? In every festival?" Okay, I think I understand. You are viewing the festival contests as a sort of random draw based off the statistical probability appeal. The problem is, it's a lottery. If the same person were winning 10 months of Roundey's Raffle Roulette in a row, I might agree! There's something clearly wrong here! But I don't understand how you can think it's wrong from a moral standpoint that the skin contests aren't statistically even odds for each participating entry.
I think the problem that most people have with this is simply that it IS a contest. I have seen so many sites that have contests such as this and most of those also have the typical 'X has won multiple contests in a row, the contest is unfair, there must be handicaps on winners to stop them from winning multiple times!'
I can sort of understand this point. It can be frustrating to constantly see the same people winning and know that you would never be able to beat them.
However, that is the point of a contest. If those people are legitimately (as in not cheating in someway) putting the work required to win the contest, then they should win that contest. To me, it is that simple.
It does get a bit blurrier when talking about contests that have more subjective metrics, such as art contests, but even then, as others have said, there is obviously specific things that the staff who picks the winners look for, and the repeat winners have figured that out and utilize that knowledge.
Even with the Roundsey thing, as long as the people who kept winning were doing so legitimately (ie buying enough tickets to consistently win), then, again, it would be frustrating, but still part of the nature of that particular type of lottery. (though I do agree that it would be more likely that someone was cheating somehow than they were able to buy enough tickets each week/month to win every time)
Honestly, to me, it gets sort of tiring to constantly see complaints about contests being 'unfair' and how they should be 'fair' and in order to do so, winners should be handicapped to prevent them from winning more often than whoever is making the complaint feels fair.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
Re: can we talk about this…
(Anonymous) 2024-06-24 07:45 pm (UTC)(link)Sorry, what do you mean here by six elemental flights?
"Like slowly think about it what is the statistical probability that one slot will always be won by (user)? In every festival?"
Okay, I think I understand. You are viewing the festival contests as a sort of random draw based off the statistical probability appeal. The problem is, it's a lottery. If the same person were winning 10 months of Roundey's Raffle Roulette in a row, I might agree! There's something clearly wrong here! But I don't understand how you can think it's wrong from a moral standpoint that the skin contests aren't statistically even odds for each participating entry.
Re: can we talk about this…
(Anonymous) 2024-06-24 07:49 pm (UTC)(link)Re: can we talk about this…
(Anonymous) 2024-06-25 12:52 am (UTC)(link)I think the problem that most people have with this is simply that it IS a contest. I have seen so many sites that have contests such as this and most of those also have the typical 'X has won multiple contests in a row, the contest is unfair, there must be handicaps on winners to stop them from winning multiple times!'
I can sort of understand this point. It can be frustrating to constantly see the same people winning and know that you would never be able to beat them.
However, that is the point of a contest. If those people are legitimately (as in not cheating in someway) putting the work required to win the contest, then they should win that contest. To me, it is that simple.
It does get a bit blurrier when talking about contests that have more subjective metrics, such as art contests, but even then, as others have said, there is obviously specific things that the staff who picks the winners look for, and the repeat winners have figured that out and utilize that knowledge.
Even with the Roundsey thing, as long as the people who kept winning were doing so legitimately (ie buying enough tickets to consistently win), then, again, it would be frustrating, but still part of the nature of that particular type of lottery. (though I do agree that it would be more likely that someone was cheating somehow than they were able to buy enough tickets each week/month to win every time)
Honestly, to me, it gets sort of tiring to constantly see complaints about contests being 'unfair' and how they should be 'fair' and in order to do so, winners should be handicapped to prevent them from winning more often than whoever is making the complaint feels fair.