Yeah, which needs to be changed. Once again, WD reports were really pathetic for last season. Most people never even
did any past the first couple episodes, as usual. Something needs to change, like I've been saying... I don't see what the huge deal is about actually
allowing people to WD for someone they like. I'll be back in college full time and working and planning for living 6 months abroad, I don't want to
force myself to make an effort of WD reports for someone I don't like, like what happened with James in China. I don't see what the harm is in letting
people choose their WD's. The current way of doing it is NOT working, at all. If not, I'd say to just eliminate WD'ing all together because hardly
anyone even puts any effort into it...
0 Kudo
- Survivor Sucks
- Lions, Tigers, Survivors - Oh My!
- Survivor Spoilers
- MESS Hall Tribal Council
- FOB
- Survivor Speculation
- Survivor 18+
- MESS Hall Archive: S2-S6
- MESS Hall Archive: S7-S9
- Spoiler Attic
- The Amazing Race
- Big Brother
- Big Brother - PAST SEASONS
- The Apprentice
- American Idol
- American Idol PAST SEASONS
- The Mole
- Lost
- Other Shows That Suck
- Off Topic
- Clubs That Suck. No, Really.
- The Dump
- Monster Island
- Purgatory
- FAQ
- In Memory, 9/11/01
S-16 Edgic (editing and logic)
| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 astroline |
|||
|
Posts: 1299 (08/27/08 3:56 PM) Registered user |
|
||
|
Kitty Pryde1 |
|||
|
Posts: 5398 (08/27/08 4:54 PM) |
Hey! I watchdogged Tracy pretty well. Granted, I liked her, and she was actually worth watchdogging (I'm looking at youuuuuu, Natalie/Alexis), but still.
Also, I can understand the reason why watchdogging is random. Because if everyone gets someone they like, then their ratings will be biased or skewed. I
mean, look at me and craig last season. There were many implications of us giving more favorable ratings to Tracy and Parvati because we were big fans of
them. While randomness isn't perfect, it does guarantee we have a better chance of unbiased watchdogs.
|
||
|
astroline |
|||
|
Posts: 1303 (08/27/08 5:11 PM) Registered user |
I definitely wasn't referring to you, Kitty. You did an awesome job with Tracy. =)
But I also believe, randomness leads to unbiasedness, true, but then also to very little motivation. Which is the case for most WD's. |
||
|
beatles20147 |
|||
|
Posts: 11711 (08/27/08 5:27 PM) Registered User |
Granted, I don't know if I even did a single Ozzy WD report after the premiere, but if WD assignments are supposed to be done before the show starts, you
really don't have much indication as to who's going to motivate you or not, even if you watch the videos and read Jeff's pre-show interviews. I
remember before Palau I asked to be Jenn's WD and got to be, but then you saw how she was edited. And correct me if I'm wrong, but was Kitty really a
big Tracy fan before the second episode where we saw how much game she had? Personally, I think it's at a point where you'd be hard-pressed to find 18
people motivated enough to do full-on Watchdogging, let alone one motivated enough for each player.
|
||
|
BlakeB717 |
|||
|
Posts: 935 (08/27/08 5:30 PM) Registered user |
My personal opinions is that WatchDogs are completely pointless and all close calls should be voted upon by a select few veteran edgicers.
|
||
|
Dictatorship |
|||
|
Posts: 3430 (08/27/08 5:55 PM) Crying my eyes out
|
I love reading the WD reports as well, and it's annoying as hell when half the people refuse to contribute although they are the designated WD.
|
||
|
MasterDarkNinja |
|||
|
Posts: 2769 (08/27/08 6:34 PM) Registered User |
I'm personally against people picking players to watchdog, and I mean like Beatles said preseason your opinions about people can easily change from their
edit. Remember S12 Bobby, he looked like an awesome guy who would be a great OTT character, and then he got almost nothing on the show. And it's clear if
you listen to Willard in an interview that the guy was quite a character who could have been very lovable and entertaining, but all he got was a bit of a
cranky mean old lazy man edit on the show. Then there's always some people each season who people thinks "well this person is going to be a dull
loser" who become great characters to watch.
But yeah, I'll be a watchdog, I don't care for who, I haven't had any time to read anyone's bios or watch their videos yet. |
||
|
OnlyMatthew |
|||
|
Posts: 1241 (08/27/08 7:19 PM) Registered user |
I'm down for being a watchdog if you guys need an extra. It'll be my first time though :O
|
||
 Oowatanite |
|||
|
Posts: 5599 (08/27/08 7:53 PM) Registered User |
BlakeB717 wrote: 
There have been many problems with watchdogs in the last few seasons. 1. Lack of watchdog player reports by a lot of "watchdogs". 2. Loving or hating your watchdog player, resulting in skewed reports and meaningless arguments. 3. Some watchdog reports are TOO detailed. I don't care to know that "Charlie" got up in the morning and seemed to give "Betty" a dirty look while tending the campfire, after which he asked "Andy" how he slept last night. I just ignore the detailed verbose watchdog reports. We're not getting paid by the word for these reports. All that is needed is the highlights of the episode for your player. A few small paragraphs and that's it. I would favour getting rid of the watchdogs, have everyone give ratings and comments on the episodes and, as Blake says, a group of five veteran unbiased edgicers will settle the close calls. Warrior, flf, OTH, beatles and chaperone would be excellent candidates for this. Everyone can throw their two cents into the close call discussion but these five edgicers would have the final call. |
||
|
Werwanderflugen |
|||
|
Posts: 146 (08/27/08 8:23 PM) Registered user |
I thought I'd pop back in for a moment... yeah, I was definitely a "pathetic WD" last year. I hope I can still contribute in rankings and some discussion this year, though. Edgic really makes watching the show even more interesting than it already
is.
|
||
|
Riliss |
|||
|
Posts: 4319 (08/27/08 9:52 PM) Ugly on the inside |
Hey guys, Craig, Oo, and ILT emailed me a preview of their episode 1 edgic ratings! I tried to avoid reprinting any potential spoilers they included in the
email, since they'll pretend to not know them when the final draft of their ratings come out.
Enjoy! Kelly - CPP4 - I know that her head bob during the opening credits seems insignificant, but think back on both Tina and Parvati's intro shots. Didn't both of those intro shots feature pictures of Tina and Parvati? I believe the evidence speaks for itself. Also, Kelly's scene after the immunity challenge when she pulled the bikini out of her ass signals to me and my braintrust that she's going to make it 'all the way to the end.' Those editors will never fool us with their metaphoric editing. Papilloma- CPPP5 - Now, a lot of you are going to say, "But Craig/ILT/Oo, she only had one line and that was when Jeff asked her name." It's true - but pull your heads out of your asses people! There's never been a more memorable reaction shot and response than the way she powerfully, yet innocently (like a sweet, ripe 11 year old girl) said back to Jeff, "Paloma." That along with the cymbol crash when Randy told her to go fuck herself signals winner to me. Crystal - UTRN1 - Did we really need a five minute conversation between her and that other darkie about whatever the fuck it was they were talking about? Probably afro picks or fried chicken. Either way she obviously won't win. Total whore. Michelle - OTTP3 - Her ADORABLE five minute chat with Ace about his hairstyle and mayonaise recipie was nothing short of epic. Her sweet, ripe, eleven year old features along with her brilliant wit and vast world experience make her one to watch. |
||
|
Zesty66 |
|||
|
Posts: 806 (08/28/08 12:18 AM) |
I am not sure what the rules are, but if anyone can have a go at watchdogging, I would like Kelly please.
|
||
|
craig |
|||
|
Posts: 13797 (08/28/08 1:25 AM) Registered User |
Last season there was a certain balance it that Parvati, Cirie, Eliza, and Tracy all drew WDs who liked and championed them. Sometimes randomness simply means
that some players have sympathetic WDs and others don't.
IMO, the ideal WD selection system would combine a random draw with people being able to rule out 6 or 9 or whatever players that they'll never like or care about. I'm willing to WD again, however they are assigned. I also think edgic could get along fine without WDs.
Last Edited By: craig
08/28/08 1:28 AM.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
|
OnlyMatthew |
|||
|
Posts: 1253 (08/28/08 10:04 AM) Registered user |
I don't understand watchdogs, if you've ruled out their chances, do you still keep watchdogging them?
|
||
|
OnlyTheHunter |
|||
|
Posts: 1588 (08/28/08 10:07 AM) Edgician |
Many here can recall, the purpose of needing watchdogs was to avoid missing Chris when being written off by some. If you had Natalie last year, there was no
need for any reports. Three episodes in she is done edgically, period. As far as contenders go, Parvati, Cirie and Alexis were on most everyone's radar
early, so they weren't missed. I think the purpose is not as necessary as far as missing someone.
Chris got written off due in some part to Complex Tribe theory, which some, including me, never consider. I don't think that would happen again. I think the concept has worked damn fine, but it isn't about seeing a glossy report on every player each week, it's about finidng the winner. Even if Alexis' watchdog would have discounted her, I didn't let go for a while. So I don't know how pressing it is. Any more opinions? Michael |
||
|
astroline |
|||
|
Posts: 1306 (08/28/08 10:43 AM) Registered user |
Okay, well if it's just gonna be random again, then count me out. I'll still be doing all the other stuff though.
|
||
|
fat little fingers |
|||
|
Posts: 5560 (08/28/08 10:43 AM) Registered User |
I pretty much echo Michael's comments. Watchdogging has become focused
more on the strongest edits, which is the opposite of why they were created, (a la Chris). It's also become a fan medium. I don't want Edgic filled
up with fan reports guised as Watchdog reports.
My suggestion is to leave the Watchdog assignments until after the season has begun. If any character seems to fit the Chris situation, we can ask for a volunteer at that point. We do need our tone, rating, and visibility watch dogs to break voting ties. Which brings us to the really big issue this season: Will someone please take on chap's management of the voting site and compiling the stats? Chap is ready to help pass these along to someone who is willing. If you think this is something you can do or would like to learn to do, please pm chaperone. Losing these important features will hurt! |
||
|
Francois40 |
|||
|
Posts: 2446 (08/28/08 11:54 AM) Registered user |
I'll watchdog again, and I know I fell down on the job last time--but I had Amanda, ferchrissake.
|
||
|
OnlyTheHunter |
|||
|
Posts: 1589 (08/28/08 12:46 PM) Edgician |
Now I'm tying into FLF. Parvati and Chris were noticed in ep 1, then went UTR for a long stretch, but both got meaningful scenes during that time, then
jumped out post merge. Where Chris didn't get enough consideration, Parvati got it day 1. And rightfully so. That's why I'm not really concerned
about Watchdogs. I was always a big proponent of it at first, but I just think collectively we've improved enough that the need isn't the same. It
really isn't that hard to see 20 characters and knock most out of contention, correctly, early.
But I'll play either way. I just recall the one year recently when I wasn't ToneDog, I was Cassandra's watchdog. I barely tried doing any reports, because there was clearly no means to an end in my view. After episode 2, she was done. (The promise of ep 1 made her an end-gamer only.) A few did want to make a case for her late, and memorably did. If the case has merit, someone here will convince others to look. I don't doubt that at all. If forced to vote, I'd say just forget watchdogging for the time being, but give extra care to your own episodic rankings. Things should shake out after ep 1-2 well enough. Oh, and we'll see how the "first" episode goes. I loved PI, but the middle section of that 90 minute opening dragged badly. I think I've wanted a 2 hour premiere since Vanuatu was cut so bad, but really, we'll see. I'd be shocked to get one, since they would still need an extra episode for a boot to stay on schedule. Michael. edited - crappy grammar as always!
Last Edited By: OnlyTheHunter
08/28/08 2:55 PM.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
|
craig |
|||
|
Posts: 13799 (08/28/08 12:53 PM) Registered User |
My suggestion is to leave the Watchdog assignments until after the season has begun. If any character seems to fit the Chris situation, we can ask for a volunteer at that point. The best way to avoid being blindsided by a Chris situation is to cultivate an anti-groupthink mentality and be respectful of minority opinion - not try to dismiss it with cries of "you must be biased, or reading spoilers, or you're obviously out to lunch." Back in S9 we'd just had several UTR\MOR winners (like Scout), we'd seen several CP males lose in a row (Rob C, Rob M), we'd seen some winners
with negattivity (like Eliza, Twila), and we'd never lean the Complex tribe lose to a lone person.
|
||
Sorry, but after about 2-3 episodes of Natalie Nothingness, I became
rather bored with it... and by the time she "appeared," her edgic chances were long gone so I'd lost any interest in it. So I do
apologize for that, yall.
- Survivor Sucks
- Lions, Tigers, Survivors - Oh My!
- Survivor Spoilers
- MESS Hall Tribal Council
- FOB
- Survivor Speculation
- Survivor 18+
- MESS Hall Archive: S2-S6
- MESS Hall Archive: S7-S9
- Spoiler Attic
- The Amazing Race
- Big Brother
- Big Brother - PAST SEASONS
- The Apprentice
- American Idol
- American Idol PAST SEASONS
- The Mole
- Lost
- Other Shows That Suck
- Off Topic
- Clubs That Suck. No, Really.
- The Dump
- Monster Island
- Purgatory
- FAQ
- In Memory, 9/11/01
