Optional judgment

[Dirge]

That wouldn't work because the number you give would be no different than if the judge just kept the hidden score... and it would be more accurate still if they did keep the score hidden. Just handing out a set amount of exp for good, bad, and amazing threads isn't the topic, and would put more bias on the players involved as well as how the mod reads it.

Say a mod looks over my thread... they say, yeah, it's good. Here's 1000 exp. That's not going to work, even though the system says a good thread should get that much. I'm level 5, if they skim it and keep the number secret but use the formula I would receive 3000+ exp.

[Camella]

That wouldn't work because the number you give would be no different than if the judge just kept the hidden score... and it would be more accurate still if they did keep the score hidden. Just handing out a set amount of exp for good, bad, and amazing threads isn't the topic, and would put more bias on the players involved as well as how the mod reads it.

Say a mod looks over my thread... they say, yeah, it's good. Here's 1000 exp. That's not going to work, even though the system says a good thread should get that much. I'm level 5, if they skim it and keep the number secret but use the formula I would receive 3000+ exp.

Actually, I said 100, not 1000, but I see your point. All I'm saying is we may be approaching this from the wrong angle. Instead of trying to cut down on the wait time, reward them for patience, while leaving a n option open for those not-so-patient types.

[Godhand]

Hell, I'm always in favor of options. I mean I'd probably never use this because I fear change but it's still nice to know I could, you know?

[Karuka]

I don't really like the idea of punishing the impatient types. After all, it's less work on a mod to skim and guestimate (with accuracy, I might add. I know that for me, if I skimmed, the range would probably only be within a couple of points). It saves them time and gets threads out of the queue faster. So I'm in favor of full points for impatients.

[Call me J]

Right, but hasn't that always been the distinction between "quests" and "battles" on Althanas? "Quests", though they might involve battles, do not have scored winners and losers whereas "battles" do. It seems to me like you feel that the no-judge should not be extended to battles. I agree with you.

I don't mind if no judge is extended to battles, but only if it is understood that the battle, in terms of EXP allocation, will be treated as a quest. If two people are battling for fun and are not interested in seeing who the better writer is, I don't mind if they submit a battle as no judge and accept roughly equal amounts of EXP (all other variables held constant). Where we are definitely in agreement is a competitive battle should be scored.

[Saxon]

I'd like to see this idea implemented immediately. I know there are quite a few times I write that I wished there was an easier way to obtain experience than to sit and write something for months and hope for a great score. For a perfectionist like me, this seems like an all around good idea that seems to take immense pressure off the judge's shoulders, and from what little I read it gives a chance for players who prefer to roleplay over writing to actually do that and not be tied up with the process of treating this like a workshop.

Sounds like an all around win/win to me. Somebody draft up a proposal and put this bad boy on the frontlines, I'm sure we'll be hearing the collective sigh of relief from all the current judges around once they see our staff has established an express lane.

[Edward Judorne]

I don't really like the idea of punishing the impatient types. After all, it's less work on a mod to skim and guestimate (with accuracy, I might add. I know that for me, if I skimmed, the range would probably only be within a couple of points). It saves them time and gets threads out of the queue faster. So I'm in favor of full points for impatients.

Yeah, but I wouldn't want it abused either. take this example:

X knows he'll get a 600 exp for sure if he uses the quick turn-in. He thinks he did a craptastic job on a quest, so he uses this option to net more exp than if he turned it in normally.

That is the other reason I set the make believe exp points so low.

Also, if you make the exp total a set amount, It wouldn't really be punishment if they chose to take that option because they know about what they will get when they make the choice.

[Karuka]

Yeah, but I wouldn't want it abused either. take this example:

X knows he'll get a 600 exp for sure if he uses the quick turn-in. He thinks he did a craptastic job on a quest, so he uses this option to net more exp than if he turned it in normally.

That is the other reason I set the make believe exp points so low.

Also, if you make the exp total a set amount, It wouldn't really be punishment if they chose to take that option because they know about what they will get when they make the choice.

It's more like it'd be an abuse to set the low, standard EXP gains for any given quest if they get it skimmed. That means we don't need to read it at all, just give them the EXP and go. We do still want to reward quality so that our players can continue to improve.

[Edward Judorne]

Hence why I set multiple set exp based on performance, but you do have a point.

Also, keep in mind the exp I gave were just so I could give an example. I don't expect them to be as low as I put them.

In any case, you are right. bad idea.

[AdventWings]

Ooh, this is a scary note for me, as I have always preferred full judging so I know how far I've come and how far I still have to go.

However, I'm not against this idea of a Speed Judging Request. It could help to speed up your EXP and GP gains, but asides from those two you're not getting much out of the thread. Unless you already know what you did wrong. (Ha)