SubmitYourDraft.com is LIVE. Please check it out!

[Ben Titmarsh]

Hey guys,

www.SubmitYourDraft.com is finally available!  I'd really appreciate it if you guys could check it out, have a play around and let me know what you think.  You can use the site in one of two ways:

1. Submit your own MODO drafts, instructions are here: http://www.submityourdraft.com/faq

If you choose to do this, your draft will be available for rating by the rest of the community.

2. Critique other peoples drafts.  On a pick-by-pick basis you can decide if you agree or disgaree.  This will cause the pick to get a rating, modify the overall draft rating and modify the members overall rating.

If you don't want to do either of these, then feel free to just check it out and read the draft recaps.  However, signing up will literally take 30 seconds of your time, no email confirmations or anything painful like that, just the basic details.  Register here: http://www.submityourdraft.com/register

While using the site, if you get an error page, then the problem will be automatically flagged with me.  For all other issues, cosmetic, usability, suggestions etc then please leave me a message here or send me an email: [e-mail]

I'm hoping to build up a bit of a community of contributors and critics.  So to kick it all off, I've submitted a couple of my own drafts.  Please head over to submityourdraft.com and let me know what you think.  I look forward to your comments!

[Thomas David Baker]

Ooooh no.

I definitely think the "thing" is that you are always picking for *this* pick as though you had made all of *their* picks so far. Otherwise you'll be P3P1-ing a Rite of Replication when they aren't even in U because in *your* draft they are in U. Yuk!

Paul Hodgson said:

Ben, would you consider repeating the summary of picks to date, but showing what the current logged in user has selected instead? If I start off with picking a card from a different colour, and then go further into that colour "my" draft (esp pack 1) looks wildly different to the poster's. It would be nice to be able to see this visual comparison, and could help with examining my own pick orders in reference to the original.

[Thom Richardson]

paul,

I think that goes against the general philosophy of making the right pick in the current situation.

if you rate subesquent picks as if you had picked what you wanted each time then you can't have anything sensible after pick 8 as the whole draft goes a different direction if you pick different colours

also I'd like to apologise to whoever has the gatekeeper of malikir draft, my shoal serpent pick was me trying to test out the new delete your pick function that is coming soon, not currently avaliable. oops reading is tech

[Ben Titmarsh]

We need to make sure that voters assume all other picks were made as per the original drafter. Rather than saying this explicitly, I felt that the "previous picks" section kind of made this implicit. This is for two reasons:

1) By picking different cards you are having a fundamental impact on the draft. If you decide to first pick crypt ripper when the person drafting took welkin tern, then that 9th pick crypt ripper you couldn't believe was still there just completely fucked with space and time.

2) It's more useful to the person who posted the draft if voters are making their decision given the same information. A different evaluation, with a different context is essentially meaningless information for the drafter. If you think they should have gone blue when they didn't, then make that opinion known on the relevant pick(s) only, but try to forget it for the rest of the picks.

It's a difficult one to enforce and much thought has been had. Interested to hear any more suggestions about how we can guide people to use the site this way without an explicit set of rules.

Paul Hodgson said:

Ben, would you consider repeating the summary of picks to date, but showing what the current logged in user has selected instead? If I start off with picking a card from a different colour, and then go further into that colour "my" draft (esp pack 1) looks wildly different to the poster's. It would be nice to be able to see this visual comparison, and could help with examining my own pick orders in reference to the original.

[ross miles]

i dont think you can do a lot about this without becoming a bit stalin about the whole thing (he was a great drafter bythe way).

in the end the overall % doesnt matter so when look back over a draft it is easy to discount the picks of people who are going in a different direction. personally i also really want to see when someone would have taken a very different colour choice to me or started taking a second colour that i missed so seeing how they would have done 2/3 picks in a row different can be quite enlightening. only in one draft that i have seen has someone continued for the whole draft to take colours that the drafter was not in.

[Thom Richardson]

you could just expand the FAQ a little bit

[Ben Titmarsh]

Here's another question for you guys. I want to figure out some way to rate voters (people who only vote on picks and don't post drafts). I was thinking about the following:

- 1 point for each vote. In addition I will add a +1 button next to each vote. If another member particularly appreciates the opinion or argument of the vote, they can '+1' the vote, giving the member an extra 10 points on their voter rating.

Thoughts?

[Paul Hodgson]

I'm not so sure that that is the "thing", especially since in a fixing light environment such as ZZW that once you're committed to a colour your options narrow dramatically. Post pick 4/5 there are few meaningful choices to be made - don't think I've seen a draft yet below 50% agree. The choices that you do make have to be influenced by the choices that came before, and if you're trying to highlite a different draft strategy that was available it could be advantageous to easily see what "your" picks were to date.

Have thought of another feature/section though, now that there's a sizeable database of real boosters on the site could we have a "what's the first pick" tab?

Thomas David Baker said:

Ooooh no.

I definitely think the "thing" is that you are always picking for *this* pick as though you had made all of *their* picks so far. Otherwise you'll be P3P1-ing a Rite of Replication when they aren't even in U because in *your* draft they are in U. Yuk!

Paul Hodgson said:

Ben, would you consider repeating the summary of picks to date, but showing what the current logged in user has selected instead? If I start off with picking a card from a different colour, and then go further into that colour "my" draft (esp pack 1) looks wildly different to the poster's. It would be nice to be able to see this visual comparison, and could help with examining my own pick orders in reference to the original.

[Simon Baldwin]

Is that -1 (negative one) per vote? Or plus one point per vote? (I'm unsure if that's a negative identificator or a bullet point...)

Do voters get points if they are in the majority of agreement per pick? I.e. If over 50% of other voters agree with your pick, do you/they get points?

The additional points for helpful comments is a good idea, might encourage people to comment more (although if you want to be giving points for helpful comments, check how much space people have to make comments as I've run out of characters once or twice)

Ben Titmarsh said:

Here's another question for you guys. I want to figure out some way to rate voters (people who only vote on picks and don't post drafts). I was thinking about the following:

- 1 point for each vote. In addition I will add a +1 button next to each vote. If another member particularly appreciates the opinion or argument of the vote, they can '+1' the vote, giving the member an extra 10 points on their voter rating.

Thoughts?

[Thom Richardson]

but it doesnt work at all if you view it that way

lets say I'm in RW but have passed loads of good blue. for the first 8 picks you can reasonably say look at this good blue deck you could have been taking but past that point none of the picks would have been the same

everyone at the tables picks will have changed becuase of which colours you are in. so by the time you get to pack 2 the entire exercise is pointless if you rate the picks that way.


for example:

lets say i passed 3rd pick living tsunami, everyone is going to comment that maybe i should have gone into blue there.

but its not that helpful to stick with the idea that i should be in blue and start telling me to take the 6th pick into the roil over sactifiers for the RW deck I am actually drafting.

and then when i open journey and geopede in pack two and it is interesting to see what people think is best for the deck at that point, its not vey usefult to be told to grab the spinx for the sick blue deck i should have been drafting


Paul Hodgson said:

I'm not so sure that that is the "thing", especially since in a fixing light environment such as ZZW that once you're committed to a colour your options narrow dramatically. Post pick 4/5 there are few meaningful choices to be made - don't think I've seen a draft yet below 50% agree. The choices that you do make have to be influenced by the choices that came before, and if you're trying to highlite a different draft strategy that was available it could be advantageous to easily see what "your" picks were to date.

Have thought of another feature/section though, now that there's a sizeable database of real boosters on the site could we have a "what's the first pick" tab?

Thomas David Baker said:

Ooooh no.

I definitely think the "thing" is that you are always picking for *this* pick as though you had made all of *their* picks so far. Otherwise you'll be P3P1-ing a Rite of Replication when they aren't even in U because in *your* draft they are in U. Yuk!

Paul Hodgson said:

Ben, would you consider repeating the summary of picks to date, but showing what the current logged in user has selected instead? If I start off with picking a card from a different colour, and then go further into that colour "my" draft (esp pack 1) looks wildly different to the poster's. It would be nice to be able to see this visual comparison, and could help with examining my own pick orders in reference to the original.

[Ben Titmarsh]

Each voter will get one point per comment, regardless of how many people agree/disagree. The value is in the opinion itself, not the ability to sheep-it-up for points! I want to reward people who comment regularly

In addition, next to each comment from other users, you may press the PLUS ONE button. In the same way that on forum threads people type +1 when they agree with an opinion, or the way digg.com works. Clicking this button adds 10 points to the members voter score. This way, people who provide constructive or interesting arguments will be rewarded by others in the community

Simon Baldwin said:

Is that -1 (negative one) per vote? Or plus one point per vote? (I'm unsure if that's a negative identificator or a bullet point...)

Do voters get points if they are in the majority of agreement per pick? I.e. If over 50% of other voters agree with your pick, do you/they get points?

The additional points for helpful comments is a good idea, might encourage people to comment more (although if you want to be giving points for helpful comments, check how much space people have to make comments as I've run out of characters once or twice)

Ben Titmarsh said:

Here's another question for you guys. I want to figure out some way to rate voters (people who only vote on picks and don't post drafts). I was thinking about the following:

- 1 point for each vote. In addition I will add a +1 button next to each vote. If another member particularly appreciates the opinion or argument of the vote, they can '+1' the vote, giving the member an extra 10 points on their voter rating.

Thoughts?

[Simon Baldwin]

Seems fair, I'd suggest just implementing that and seeing how it works out before adding anything extra though.

Ben Titmarsh said:

Each voter will get one point per comment, regardless of how many people agree/disagree. The value is in the opinion itself, not the ability to sheep-it-up for points! I want to reward people who comment regularly

In addition, next to each comment from other users, you may press the PLUS ONE button. In the same way that on forum threads people type +1 when they agree with an opinion, or the way digg.com works. Clicking this button adds 10 points to the members voter score. This way, people who provide constructive or interesting arguments will be rewarded by others in the community

Simon Baldwin said:

Is that -1 (negative one) per vote? Or plus one point per vote? (I'm unsure if that's a negative identificator or a bullet point...)

Do voters get points if they are in the majority of agreement per pick? I.e. If over 50% of other voters agree with your pick, do you/they get points?

The additional points for helpful comments is a good idea, might encourage people to comment more (although if you want to be giving points for helpful comments, check how much space people have to make comments as I've run out of characters once or twice)

Ben Titmarsh said:

Here's another question for you guys. I want to figure out some way to rate voters (people who only vote on picks and don't post drafts). I was thinking about the following:

- 1 point for each vote. In addition I will add a +1 button next to each vote. If another member particularly appreciates the opinion or argument of the vote, they can '+1' the vote, giving the member an extra 10 points on their voter rating.

Thoughts?

[Thom Richardson]

+1 in favour of the plus 1 idea