Create Account

Media Grading
#1
(This post was last modified: 10-18-2020, 09:59 AM by mee.)

Hi how are you guys?

I'm pretty new to this site, not going to lie and I hope I'm not challenging any norms here. I have no idea what you guys did prior to S53 so if what I'm saying has been discussed ad nauseam I am sorry.

But I am wondering about the flat rate per word media grading. Can anybody read these two articles and tell me they deserve the same amount of money? One Two. Honestly, I'd think we'd all agree article two deserves more. Way more work but into it, and some nice graphics. Well article two got 1.45M, but article one got 1.725M. Does that make any sense?
How about this article? A bit short yes, but 848K is literally half of article one. Personally, I enjoyed Wagner's article a lot more.

I don't know what a media graders job is. Literally all they do is make sure the media isn't plagiarized and award the number of words claimed? I guess they do double check the word count against wordcounter.net, but is that really it?

Does anybody want to see 1,000 articles like the first one I linked above? This isn't a shot at Zakkira, he's just playing the rules right. 

Now there are bonuses. I haven't seen any solid rubric anywhere on this site as to when they may be awarded.

Why can't we have a rubric the same way sig grading does? Is there even a bonus for graphics in league media? Word count is a lazy way to grade media.we should be awarding quality media, not word quantity.

The goal of league media is to increase activity, and to have a sort of feel to the league like there is a media following. The point is not to read someone's gibberish rantings (not a shot at anyone..except maybe Luffy Richard..but we love the whale tails just for the name). 

So thank you for reading this gibberish rant. I would love to see this become a decent discussion here. I don't really have a good solution. A rubric from 1-4 as a modifier on the word count? I really don't have an answer yet, I'd like to start a discussion. {Insert rant about how neither side in American politics seem interested in discussion right now which might break our country faster than a 6-3 conservative court OR a court packing strategy}

Class S55
Reincarnated- Class S71

[Image: x17WALp.png][Image: uNh8ZtE.png]
Reply
#2

Article one looks like part of it is just FHMs play by play output as well.

[Image: Oats.gif]




Player Page | Player Update
[Image: 401.png] [Image: S42cup1.png] [Image: r-Wt4-AB350oooo.png][Image: WuTGq5J.png][Image: XUMDqMO.png]
Reply
#3

So I've been thinking about this, and mentioned it to Nok in the Vancouver LR, and here is my proposal. 
A grade of the quality of the media would be applied, let's say 1-10, where 10 is a perfectly written article with nice graphics etc, and a one is pure gibberish, like article one that I posted above. A five would be the average grade for a run of the mill article.
This number would be multiplied by the word count. Then divided by 5. That would be the final "Effective Word Count" which could then follow the same scale as it does now. 
There is work to do as far as defining the exact scale, but this is the basic idea.

Please respond, I'd like to make this a better place.

Class S55
Reincarnated- Class S71

[Image: x17WALp.png][Image: uNh8ZtE.png]
Reply
#4

J Media Graders just need to give out better bonuses for good media

@Zoone16 and the SHL Media Graders do a good job of this




[Image: fishyshl.gif]
Thanks to everybody for the sigs :peepoheart:

[Image: czechpp.png][Image: czechup.png]
Reply
#5

10-18-2020, 10:57 PMmee Wrote: So I've been thinking about this, and mentioned it to Nok in the Vancouver LR, and here is my proposal. 
A grade of the quality of the media would be applied, let's say 1-10, where 10 is a perfectly written article with nice graphics etc, and a one is pure gibberish, like article one that I posted above. A five would be the average grade for a run of the mill article.
This number would be multiplied by the word count. Then divided by 5. That would be the final "Effective Word Count" which could then follow the same scale as it does now. 
There is work to do as far as defining the exact scale, but this is the basic idea.

Please respond, I'd like to make this a better place.
To be fair to sparky, if you think the first article you linked is pure gibberish, you haven’t taken a  look at the invalid media section in SHL media. That is nowhere near a 1 in effort.

I don’t mind this style of bonus giving, but as fish mentioned, the SHL graders already give out fairly good bonuses.

in general, I really hate punishing people and making it harder to earn $ here. Is it tiresome to see the same article 15 times when the x2 draft media comes around? Sure. But to penalize someone for lower effort (but still valid) media isn’t the solution. Better bonuses for excellent quality media is. And I’m not talking about the real shit tier media that we sometimes get. That can be yeeted straight into the invalid section.

Thanks Wasty, Carpy, JSS, TurdFerguson, Geekusoid and Awesomecakes for the sigs!
[Image: reidsuth.gif]
Reply
#6

10-19-2020, 12:17 AMreid Wrote: To be fair to sparky, if you think the first article you linked is pure gibberish, you haven’t taken a  look at the invalid media section in SHL media. That is nowhere near a 1 in effort.
hey i put a lot of effort into my invalid media

[Image: arTbD7O.png]

Germany Berserkers Stampede Stars Barracuda syndicate
Reply
#7

10-18-2020, 10:59 PMjfisherr Wrote: J Media Graders just need to give out better bonuses for good media

@Zoone16 and the SHL Media Graders do a good job of this

I also think an issue in the SMJHL is a lack of bonuses, it's a necessary incentive to see an increase in media quality.

I do have to side with @mee here, some of the threads like the first one linked by @mee are daily, barely get any views or replies because of how repetitive and bland they are. I really don't mean to be harmful against the author, and I think if they weren't daily there would be more attention given to them. It buries other creative articles and limits visibility for other authors.

I don't find it unfair they make lots of money for those articles, but I really think it limits the creativity in the SMJHL media. I think a weekly limit on articles or bonuses for content with additional efforts would fix this. The effort in some of those daily articles is sometimes so sub-par that it does bring the question of if they are abusing this system.

[Image: Ympmk6b.png]
[Image: KXQzCef.png]

[Image: QhAQn2i.png][Image: yIvjn4j.png][Image: iB9r7kM.png]
Huge thanks to @Carpy48 and @sulovilen for the signature!
Reply
#8
(This post was last modified: 10-19-2020, 08:25 AM by Zoone16.)

Heya, I’m mostly responding to this because I was tagged by @"jfisherr" . It sounds to me like there’s issues with giving out bonuses in the smjhl media grading team specifically. Media grading is not supposed to be only converting the word count into money. Discretionary bonuses going from x1.1 to x2 of the base payout based on the quality of the media is what it should be. Bonuses are encouraged to be given out as Ultimately this is a fun league and we want to encourage people to write creative content of all sorts.
Lastly, I disagree with giving a grade to articles (I do disagree with the gfx grading methods as a whole mind you). Giving a grade will stifle media creativity as people will look to whomever gets the first highest grade possible and vomit out copies of their own. As I said, ultimately it falls on the media grading teams to enforce the distribution of these bonus payouts. If a grader on a team never gives out bonuses, that’s the type of person I’d look to replace as it tells me they don’t care about the position.

I’ll loop in @Leafs4ever as he’s the J media head.

[Image: Zoone16.gif]


[Image: 9QVaMRC.png] [Image: canybyK.png] [Image: sXDU6JX.png]
Reply
#9

I understand where you're coming from and I believe there should probably be some tweaks but article 1 was paid $806/word and article 2 was paid $1438/word. That's almost an 80% increase in pay from article 1 to 2.

[Image: TommySalami.gif]


Blizzard Raptors Blizzard Raptors Blizzard Raptors Blizzard Raptors Blizzard

EDM All-Time Leader in Goals, Assists and Points
Reply
#10

10-19-2020, 08:32 AMTommySalami Wrote: I understand where you're coming from and I believe there should probably be some tweaks but article 1 was paid $806/word and article 2 was paid $1438/word. That's almost an 80% increase in pay from article 1 to 2.
sounds good to me. article 1 is longer is all.

[Image: premierbromanov.gif]




Fuck the penaltys
ARGARGARHARG
[Image: EePsAwN.png][Image: sXDU6JX.png][Image: eaex9S1.png]
Reply
#11

Zakira should get a bonus for writing all these game recaps, despite us being terrible this season. That's dedication I'd like to see rewarded.

 
Falcons Monarchs Switzerland   Switzerland Monarchs Falcons
[Image: qGhUIfY.png] [Image: dGD5tIx.png]
  


Falcons Monarchs Switzerland   Switzerland Monarchs Falcons
[Image: qGhUIfY.png] [Image: dGD5tIx.png]
  


 [Image: mutedfaith.gif]
Credit for the images goes to @Carpy48, @soulja, @fever95 and @Wasty
Reply
#12

10-19-2020, 08:32 AMTommySalami Wrote: I understand where you're coming from and I believe there should probably be some tweaks but article 1 was paid $806/word and article 2 was paid $1438/word. That's almost an 80% increase in pay from article 1 to 2.

10-19-2020, 09:30 AMMutedfaith Wrote: Zakira should get a bonus for writing all these game recaps, despite us being terrible this season. That's dedication I'd like to see rewarded.


I agree that the payout is appropriate, but it feels like quantity is better than quality in the long term. I don't want to target anyone, but if you look in the SMJHL media payout, there is a clear pattern where the biggest earners are the ones with the higher frequency of media posting. That's why I feel like an article limit per week would fix a problem like this, right now someone with 4-5 articles a week will get rewarded more than someone with 1-2 articles made with more attention to detail.

And I appreciate that we have a lot of active members posting in the SMJHL media, but it seems like you should prioritize having interesting content in this section. For instance, game recaps being weekly or focused on interesting games would be more enticing to read than to read a every single game in the same thread name with the same bland layout. That section is to make the SMJHL feel more immersive, and yet the ones that are the most rewarded are the ones that have the least views/replies on their articles.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents, overall I think the payout is appropriate for the effort on a single media article, but there is a loophole about abusing the frequency of the payouts.

[Image: Ympmk6b.png]
[Image: KXQzCef.png]

[Image: QhAQn2i.png][Image: yIvjn4j.png][Image: iB9r7kM.png]
Huge thanks to @Carpy48 and @sulovilen for the signature!
Reply
#13

10-19-2020, 10:19 AMJayrome Wrote:
10-19-2020, 08:32 AMTommySalami Wrote: I understand where you're coming from and I believe there should probably be some tweaks but article 1 was paid $806/word and article 2 was paid $1438/word. That's almost an 80% increase in pay from article 1 to 2.

10-19-2020, 09:30 AMMutedfaith Wrote: Zakira should get a bonus for writing all these game recaps, despite us being terrible this season. That's dedication I'd like to see rewarded.


I agree that the payout is appropriate, but it feels like quantity is better than quality in the long term. I don't want to target anyone, but if you look in the SMJHL media payout, there is a clear pattern where the biggest earners are the ones with the higher frequency of media posting. That's why I feel like an article limit per week would fix a problem like this, right now someone with 4-5 articles a week will get rewarded more than someone with 1-2 articles made with more attention to detail.

And I appreciate that we have a lot of active members posting in the SMJHL media, but it seems like you should prioritize having interesting content in this section. For instance, game recaps being weekly or focused on interesting games would be more enticing to read than to read a every single game in the same thread name with the same bland layout. That section is to make the SMJHL feel more immersive, and yet the ones that are the most rewarded are the ones that have the least views/replies on their articles.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents, overall I think the payout is appropriate for the effort on a single media article, but there is a loophole about abusing the frequency of the payouts.

There's a few issues with this. One, earning money is the biggest hurdle new players have to overcome in this league. It makes or breaks your player. Those who can afford consistent training and coaching out-earn those who can't. Bank account is a factor we look at when drafting rookies as well. So limiting the number of articles you can write just sounds like we want to make it harder. (That said, there's an element here of "readability", where someone with 1 big article can get smothered beneath someone who writes 10 small ones. This is irrelevant to the money deserved, but I think deserves mention).

The second, there's no clear cut way to measure effort, which is what we're trying to pay for (at least it would seem). Some people do a lot of research to come up with stellar articles, but who is to say it's not just as much effort to write twice as much? no one, really. Thats why we measure the only objective thing with written media. Personally, I really enjoy that players can write whatever they want and get paid for it. If you can be a "long distance" writer, you deserve to be paid for every word.

We shouldn't be dragging "low quality" articles down, rather we should lift high-quality articles up. Because the standard is, by design, very low. The point of entry for media should be very low. This is how people like fitted make money. They are not gifted writers, and we shouldn't expect them to be.

That said, i think the real problem is that we don't really want written articles to be graded the way graphics are because its very subjective and very time consuming. Counting words works towards the need for this process to be streamlined with low overhead.

[Image: premierbromanov.gif]




Fuck the penaltys
ARGARGARHARG
[Image: EePsAwN.png][Image: sXDU6JX.png][Image: eaex9S1.png]
Reply
#14

I feel like the solution here isn't really increasing the punishment for shitty media, but increasing the reward for good media.

[Image: Duff101.gif]
Credit to Geck, Ragnar and Juni for sigs
Reply
#15

So, after talking with @Zoone16, SMJHL Media Grading will be adapting the SHL bonus system. For one, it seems like most people like the system, and two, it keeps things streamlined and makes for an easier transition from league to league.

Word Count will still be the main factor, but being able to apply a multiplier of x1.1-x2 so be able to help reward quality media pieces.

As to the point of limiting the amount you can write per week, I don't see that as a positive. The last thing we want to do is stifle activity, especially in the media sections. If someone takes time out of their day to write about their player/the league, they should not be stopped from doing so. We want more articles to read, more reasons for people to be on the site, and more things for people to talk about.

Guy Incognito - D - #24
Texas Renegades
Season 76
0-0-0
Regular Season - [G 0] [A 0] [Pts 0] [+/- 0] [PIM 0] [Hits 0] [SB 0]

[Image: ERs3IrD.png]





Reply




Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)




Navigation

 

Extra Menu

 

About us

The Simulation Hockey League is a free online forums based sim league where you create your own fantasy hockey player. Join today and create your player, become a GM, get drafted, sign contracts, make trades and compete against hundreds of players from around the world.