http://n4g.com/news/1809452...

Really?!

Cheers - I was trying to work it out, but I'd never have guessed it was for that... so many disagrees!

It's all random. Nothing about quality of content, agrees, disagrees, whether you like puppies or kittens. In the end, you just got lucky with the RNG ;)

Well, that's depressing... but winning $50 isn't!

Random numbers FTW!

I've considered that, but won't be changing the policy. It's two separate contests and if a person wants to put in more effort to win both... see no issue with that.

I don't see an issue with letting someone else who has worked just as hard win. I mean if two people have worked hard on both of them and they see the other guy has won both then he's obviously going to be like "Well why couldn't he have won one and give me or someone else the chance to win it".

Not like a person hasn't won anything if he's already won one. That prize can be spent on someone else to make more people winners.

Seems silly and a bit harsh in my opinion.

Before directly responding to this, I'll be open and admit that I'd have a totally biased opinion for the current setup. Let's just get that out of the way.

There's a couple issues I take with that kind of approach:

-If it is in the name of "fairness," how would Christopher choice which of the two I or someone else WON (<-stress that part) should be given to someone else? Would he have to go through his previous content winners lists and see which runner-up of reviews/blogs hadn't won for the longest time or based on the next best piece (according to judges' opinion)?

-Why should any double-dipping winner be penalized when every user posting original work on here has the same opportunity to win? Based on principle, isn't it more fair to allow equal opportunity vs. forced equal outcomes?

Edit: Again, just my very biased opinion.

Well if it's based on "best" then he should look at both of the things that user has won then choose the best out of those...OR if the prize value is different then he should pick the highest one for them to win at

So if a User won X and Y and X was worth $50 while Y was $25 then he would allow the user to win the $50 prize and then pick the article/review he thinks is the best while excluding the other winner...basically second best and let the runner up take the $25 one.

At the end of the day if a user has worked hard at a review or blog only to see someone (no offence but in your case, a mod aswell) win two contests then he's going to feel a little shitty and probably will be put off.

Again I'm just trying to look at their point of view.

Just stating it as I see it, no harm intended. I wouldn't like it if it happened to me and if I was on the other side and won both I probably would let someone take the lower value prize.

"Before directly responding to this, I'll be open and admit that I'd have a totally biased opinion for the current setup."

Huh, didn't expect that! Why would you of ALL people be biased? ;)

I don't see the issue with winning for a damn good blog and a damn good review, in all seriousness.

I do have a question though, since you are a mod and you vote on which blogs/reviews win, do you get to say "hey, i think that coolbeans blog was the best, just saying"

@-Foxtrot

"At the end of the day if a user has worked hard at a review or blog only to see someone (no offence but in your case, a mod aswell) win two contests then he's going to feel a little shitty and probably will be put off."

If anything, it seems like they can look at my recent work and come up with new ways to make better reviews+blogs than me. It's not like I got here without feeling similarly whenever others were chosen over mine during the years. I've worked hard with many of my blogs/reviews and come up short before.

Make no mistake: there's no hard feelings between us for you expressing your opinion on this. In fact, I do admire the honesty and I see where you're coming from. But even with us considering that, I still think the principle of equal opportunity and letting the cards fall where they may trumps forced fair outcomes and a user's feelings.

Now, if we were to make the opportunities more NUMEROUS that's something I can totally get behind. Perhaps having a standard 3 winner list for blogs and reviews at a lowered $75/$50? Sounds great to me. Either way, I'm still going to keep writing when I'm able.

@Concertoine

"I do have a question though, since you are a mod and you vote on which blogs/reviews win..."

Incorrect. I've never been involved in the voting process. If you go back to previous Contest Details you'll see blog + review winners are voted by the admin team.

***Well if it's based on "best" then he should look at both of the things that user has won then choose the best out of those***

You say "should" as if there's only one answer here. There isn't.

***he's going to feel a little shitty***

It's a contest. The point is to put out the better content and win based on that. The point is not for me to make people feel "less shitty". If you want to win, put out better content.

We're not handing out "participation" trophies here or the like. It's a contest. You submit your best work, if it wins, it wins.

***since you are a mod and you vote on which blogs/reviews win***

No moderators have any involvement in who does or doesn't win.

I would go on but when you have a mod who has won and the Admin obviously defending the decision you know it's one of those things that will never be taken into consideration

I don't see why I bothered

It's why I usually just rely on the lottery these days

Don't mind if you at least pretended to take users opinions/criticism into consideration but you never do

Just trying to help site and give other users a chance to be winners

@-Foxtrot

Okay...I feel I've presented my counter-arguments to both you and gangsta with an honest attitude; and both of you have done the same to me. At least, that's how I felt UNTIL your 7.2.5 comment. Now you're starting to act intellectually dishonest.

"...a mod who has won and the Admin obviously defending the decision you know it's one of those things that will never be taken into consideration."

In his FIRST reply to you, Christopher literally states that he's considered this in the past but arrived at a different conclusion on this than you did. In fact, it's something that the current + previous Admin have seen before. And it's nice how you conveniently ignore TWO separate third party members' statements on the matter that also challenge your stance.

"Just trying to help site and give other users a chance to be winners"

Yeah, and I presented an alternative that could do the same too. Look at my 7.2.3 comment: a biased party on the matter (like me) willing to suggest smaller prizes for more winners. That also guarantees more winners while still maintaining the equal opportunity principle I brought up.

"Don't mind if you at least pretended to take users opinions/criticism into consideration but you never do"

So lying would be the more preferred option versus challenging what you brought forth and being upfront about not changing the policy? We just can't win, can we?

Your comment's are also confusing something critical: just b/c cgood doesn't do what you want in this instance doesn't mean he didn't consider what you've brought forth. He's just responded with something that isn't to your satisfaction. If all you wanted to do was come here to change that policy, without considering other parties' counter-arguments that propose maybe the current one's a better solution, then I'm not sure why you bothered either.

Coolbeans is also a mod...I don't know...doesn't that seem like favoritism.

Especially if he won TWICE!?

That may be a negative bias on certain days when I bother him more often than not. ;)

Okay, I'm putting my serious face on now. In regards to the idea of favoritism being brought up, I've welcomed people to look at my win history since becoming a mod and you'd have to REALLY, REALLY stretch it to come to said conclusion, especially when:

-I didn't win a user review contest my first year (accumulative) after becoming a mod. The gap's between Quantum Conundrum (a little before mod, I think) to Uncharted 2: Among Thieves (over a year into volunteering).

Edit: On top of that, getting as fortunate as I am now is BECAUSE I kept trying to do better at reviewing + blogging over the years. I've taken my share of criticism then and continue to thoroughly think through my arguments of x, y, z to keep improving.

The great thing is you don't have to take my word for it. Just open a few windows between my account and Cat's old contest blogs to verify that. And it's not like I can't come out empty-handed either...like just last month: http://n4g.com/user/blogpos...

I'm not accusing mods winning all the time. What I'm saying is shouldn't there be a rule that exempts mods and admins from contests that are made for the community on this site.

It's the same way people may call foul is a Taco Bell employee wins a gold PS4...twice.

I know you and the other mods are not employees but volunteers but you have access to views and info we mortals dont and if we see you and other mods begin to win I'm sure these types of suspicions and questions will start to arise.

Anyways, congrats! I shall write a blog that will guarantee me winning next time!

Absolutely not. I mean, I know that's coming from a biased opinion such as mine, but...well look at what you stated:

"...exempts mods and admins from contests that are made for the community on this site."

But I AM of the community on this site. That's been made clear during each of the contest details rules listed.

"... but you have access to views and info we mortals dont and if we see you and other mods..."

Right, but that special access comes with the responsibility to moderate the site too. That's as far as the terms I agreed to went: with power comes responsibility. Volunteering my time shouldn't remove the option to try to win contests.

"...and other mods begin to win I'm sure these types of suspicions and questions will start to arise."

Sure, as they've creeped up a couple times before. But for that I'm just going to ask those making accusations to consider my recent work. Whether I win or lose, I believe it's quite clear I try hard to write up something that engages with those who read it (agree or disagree with my points).

***What I'm saying is shouldn't there be a rule that exempts mods and admins from contests that are made for the community on this site. ***

Mods, no, they're volunteers and don't get paid to moderate. Admins, yes, we do get compensation for what we do.

From the bottom of every contest we have on this site:

"1. Competition is open to all N4G users, except for employees of HAVAmedia and immediate relatives. Contests are not limited to the US/NA. Note: Moderators do not receive remuneration, are not employees of HAVAmedia, and are eligible for N4G monthly contests."

***It's the same way people may call foul is a Taco Bell employee wins a gold PS4...twice.***

No, it really isn't. First of all, read what coolbeans produces and tell me it's just because he's a moderator. Second, he doesn't get paid. Third, he has zero say in anything. In your scenario, that Taco Bell employee either got lucky or knew the specifics of the system to win. Fourth, what you don't know are the other checks and balances in play. While it looks like we may have 20 entries on month, you may not realize that only 5 of those are valid as the other 15 are copies from other sources, and that the resulting 5 left vary from very low quality to good quality.

***but you have access to views and info we mortals dont and if we see you and other mods begin to win I'm sure these types of suspicions and questions will start to arise. ***

Mods don't have access to views, though they do have access to who gets moderated and why. But, even then, how is that information helpful to coolbeans for writing better material? None of that data suddenly makes coolbeans a better writer or others worse writers.

The reason moderators win anything is because others just don't contribute. Plain and simple. Coolbeans contributes on a very regular basis with blogs and reviews. His competition is very small considering how few the number of people who actually contribute, let alone contribute worthwhile and original content. Removing coolbeans from the sample of possible winners only goes to lower the number of valid entries and does nothing to encourage others to writer better material at all.

Your perspective is unrealistic. Life isn't about what's fair or who's worked harder, it's about winning and losing. Clearly, Coolbeans has produced something of quality and by that standard he's earned his spot as a winner of more than a single contest. In the interest of people being given the chance to be great, I say let them earn as much as they deserve.

The best comment ever in this thread. Not sure why Foxtrot can't see this.

Get your tinfoil hat fixed.