How should Songs be Ranked

Login to vote in this poll.

There was still a lot going

There was still a lot going for rating methods more I think in all the votes.
Only a small percentage wanted RAW votes but I guess 16 Votes is not many to be definitive.
But also the voters speak, if people don't want to vote then they're lose there say on any possible later decisions.


I think it needed log in and

I think it needed log in and was unclear to non english speakers.

Total voters: 16. Whats

Total voters: 16. Whats going on, is it closed or just dead or is my computer not showing the right numbers?

I like the % of time played

I like the % of time played act as measure of whether one liked it or not.

Another idea I'd like is that the server stored each player as different stream, then using the web UI the listener could select which streams the server mixes down (so server still sends just a single stream to listener who now has ability to pick and choose the mix elements on the server).

Stars / 1-10 gives possible

Stars / 1-10 gives possible counterbalance for unfair voters, Raw Votes hasn't this property. Number Of Plays seems to lie beetween.

I want to say that if I

I want to say that if I think your JAM is crap I would say, I wouldn't need someone else to say it for me.
I don't like being taking out of context and then being made to look like I'm slagging peoples Jams, I clearly meant the sort of Jam that would consist of say an open mic with animals making noise in the background, whilst 3 songs were being playing in the same jam, with a few +30db overdriven crunched guitars from a few 1st time users. But then you find some new comer has found the vote system and a Jam will find its way to the top, then another new comer finds this is cool too, then a few oldtimers think I'm not having this then it's more about who can get more clicks.
You'd be supprised what sort of music I like, I don't listen to much but Experiemental is one of my favorite and that's been classed by some as trash.

There is a saying, "People with glass houses shouldn't throw stones."

I did an experimental thing a while ago in a server with Shadow, we were alone and just started doing some stuff, I liked it so much I put it as the first 2 tracks on my MySpace Player, the 3rd piece needs breaking up to smaller uploads.
I've had a few NINJAM's that sometimes have had some crap in them, but I still put them on my players about the net.

On some of the points raised here, the problem that popped into my mind on making a user listen to so much before being able to vote is some jams deserver a vote but some may not want to listen to whole or 2/3rd of a jam to be able to vote. Myspace tried similar and you couldn't skip through the track past 50% so you could only forward the song 50% then you had to listen to rest but this wasn't liked and has been scrapped.
I also thought in the past that making a user listen to the track first but since myspace similar I realised the con's now.
The Pro's and Con's have to be looked at on all idea's thrown up or we end up back debating it.

ATM of typing this 69% agree the current system doesn't work, as 69% of us think, plays, stars or 1-10 and 15% think the old way whilst the remaining 17% of votes think none. So people must agree to some extent that crap exists in the top NINJAMs.

So 85% disagree with how it is now, and that wouldn't be happening if they were all good Jams in the Top NINJAMS.

i really think that no

i really think that no ranking is cooler, but also some kind of interaction for the listeners would be cool to ,it could benefit the community
theres the lounge,the chat.....and the star system!! :)

Fair enough PlJ... I just

Fair enough PlJ...

I just wouldn't do it! For me it's more important to keep out of it.

Dare to be yourself. -- unfretted

> would suggest maybe 33%

> would suggest maybe 33% played, just to be conservative without being too demanding.

Maybe the size of the "vote" should be proportional to the amount of the track played?

I try to provide edits (of my stuff...) with just (what I think are) the good bits in. Is an hour session with a fantastic last ten minutes (getting played to the end) better than an hour where it falls apart after ten minutes? I can see the holes in my own idea but I was thinking about the edits, too. Needs more thought...

> I would like to see a toplist where you can't vote for your own stuff.
I don't think that could work -- you log in anonymously to NINJAM/NINBOT/etc. Just add a "_" to your nick and away you go, voting for your own stuff... And..! :) If I thought the flute player on a jam I was playing in was incredible, why shouldn't I vote for it to show appreciation?
...But how do you play with people, for people. Playing fast around the drums is one thing. But to play with people for others, to listen to, that's something else. That's a whole other world. -- Tony Williams

I have voted...but, I havn't

I have voted...but, I havn't got an exact opinion about the best way of setting up this project.

I would like to see a toplist where you can't vote for your own stuff.

plj, I like the idea of

plj, I like the idea of "complete plays", but I would modify it a bit, something more like "X percentage of track played", because we all well know that most of the time the choicest part of a 59:49 minute jam comes somewhere in the middle, and the rest isn't worth listening to.

I would suggest maybe 33% played, just to be conservative without being too demanding. That would be 20 minuytes of the 10/17 jam, which is still roaring with 72.5 thousand clicks! (or whatever the Ninjam histogram represents, now that it has been brought into quesion in the other thread - I still think it is clicks, though).

What still bothers me is, on 11/18, none of us will know how many clicks the 10/17 jam will have, because it will be pushed off the histogram list due to the 30 day limit, and there will then be no way for the end-user of the Ninjam site to access that info. All that will be available will be the number of votes (which currently stands at 58, which is by no means shabby, but pales in comparison, to, say, your average Bilos session) (JK, Bilos, I love you!!!).

To clarify my own vote, which were
(1) number of plays
(2) raw votes
(3) 1-10

I would obviously like the total number of plays to be an "eternally" available, viewable statistic for the life of the jam (and BTW, anyone that has any pull over at, maybe they could make that suggestion ovr there as well).

I also think that raw votes (despite always being legitimately threatened by "click-fraud") gives a better representaion of how many people are taking the time to actually make an effort and vote.

I think 1-10 or 5-star rankings, a la Youtube, do nothing to really demonstrate the popularity of a jam. I think the reson they work on Youtube is the exact same reason why they wouldn't work on Ninbot - the scale of the site. Youtube is so huge, the raw numbers would very quickly become meaningless and undiscernable. On the other hand, the Ninbot audience is so small, you can easily see the difference between 10 votes and 50 votes.

Again, I for one much prefer to look at the number of views on Youtube as a much more significant measure of popularity. Some videos in my personal favorites list have several million views, some as high as 6 million. That puts any kind of graded, 5-star/1-10 ranking into a kind of meaningless perspective, I feel. Frankly, I think it's just a holdover from most people's school days, when grades (apparently) meant something. %^p

BTW, thanks Tom for taking this idea seriously enough to make a poll and open a dedicated thread on the front page. I think we might all be pleasantly surprised in the end when we discover the activity that our jams are getting (hopefully I'm not just thinking wishfully, but I genuinely think I am not).

Whilst I don't think it

Whilst I don't think it should be used for ranking, "Number of complete plays" might be a nice statistic to gather. This one wouldn't need to be for only logged in users (as I suggested in the other thread for votes) but it would only be for plays through the Flash player (so you could confirm the whole track as played).
...But how do you play with people, for people. Playing fast around the drums is one thing. But to play with people for others, to listen to, that's something else. That's a whole other world. -- Tony Williams

The only voting system that

The only voting system that is valid and credible is one that one that reflects the opinions of "the audience" as one person's idea of what constitutes a pile of crap isn't necessarily widely shared. It's a bit like judging the quality of a photograph on the number of pixels rather than the impact of its content. Personally I would like to see who voted and where the votes come from, and who and where the audience for what we all love doing is located, if there is one at all. The voting system needs to reflect our audience, if such a thing exists, so that the loudest voice isn't the most influential voice. And by the way my jam of 2009/10/17 currently has a histogram rating of (70169,55) which obviously means it was very fine indeed and all involved are headed for market domination.
PS I love youse all.

Its not showing it now but

Its not showing it now but before when I voted it showed
Number of Plays, Raw Votes 22%
Now I see them seperate, I if I had a choice would Vote
1st Stars
2nd Number of Plays
3nd 1-10
4rd No Ranking is Cooler

And woudln't have voted for Raw votes, its not clear what it means but I guess it means people could just get a link spammed.
You can tell when someones done that because the tune with loads of votes is a pile of crap. :)
Not all but some really suck and must be spammed voted as they sound s a total mess and no one with a pair of ears would think otherwise. IMO ;P

The Stars is on the Ning system Ninjamers is on and I liek that but dont think its very clear to people what its for.
But it does allow for the main playlist to be set to rankings, latest, featured etc. This is handy as it can be changed form time to time with a click.

1-10 can be too much a choice, 5 stars sor tof gives you, poor 1 star, it was in tune 2 stars, not bad 3 stars, pretty good 4 stars then amazing 5 stars. That's just how it could mean to anyone, has low, mid to low, medium, medium to high, best. So its easy to judge and people can judge at a glance and click.

Raw votes, just = spam, someone can think, well there's a vote option there, its not great but not the best, but I only have 1 option and they click, the rest are just links spammed, through proxies or friends.

How ever it is, the list needs to be wiped clean once say a month or quarter to keep things fresh or songs lose votes over time and have to be revoted to keep them there.
But with this way you will always get stat whores who think the most important thing in life is pretending to be something there not or have somethign they haven't.

    © 2013 All rights reserved