TimeFest Rankings & Ratings
- Thread starter Jason Ramsey
- Start date
Mattykins
Cute Member
I was standing (rather sitting) in the wrong part of the country...haha
ConspiracyPenguin
Nosey Penguin
I must have been standing next to you.......
So that was you I was standing in front of? Sorry about that.
It is true that I met a bunch of great DVXUsers, but as far as industry professionals/executives I am sure I did not get the chance because I was sitting the whole time and then whisked out the door. Luckily it went so well I am sure I will have another opportunity.
Mark and Tim, when you guys make it big don't forget about the witty young writer who came down and hung out with you. :thumbsup:
DavisOsborne
Active member
not sure that anyone cares what an actor thinks......however, to Place in the competition is Nice, to Get to Love what you do and have others appreciate it......is Priceless)...congrats to all of you that set out to tell a story...and share your love of this art with the World.....davis
Dustin R. Rogan
Silent Bob's Evil Twin
You were in awe of seeing me sitting next to the Penguin is all...Its understandable with two legendary DVXers...
Rogan
ConspiracyPenguin
Nosey Penguin
That MUST have been it. I could just see the folks trying not to stare but doing and terrible job. I think Rice was crying in the corner. :evil:
Oh, and Dustin, when you came back from you mysterious absence I almost leaned over and said to you "I thought you were trying to quit..." but the movies were going and I hadn't talked to you enough to feel comfortable with that.
Brandon Rice
Distributed Producer
ConspiracyPenguin
Nosey Penguin
You know I wasrogar-BigGrin(DBG)
Seriously, though, man! I can't get over how we must have walked right passed each other between interviews and didn't know. I didn't pay attention to who was up before me and next thing I know John is calling me to an empty seat. Next time for sure...
Brandon Rice
Distributed Producer
It's funny, because after watching your interview now I remember seeing you standing around all night, but not knowing who you were lol
Geoff_R
Veteran
The only thing I see problematic with this is that people who already voted in round 1 now have to go back and revote... whereas with the current new system, if you already voted for those top 8 films... then you don't have to do anything additional.
Tom Marshall
Actor!!!!!!
Hey Davis... I know exactly where you're coming from... I, myself, am an actor... there's NOTHING else like it...
ConspiracyPenguin
Nosey Penguin
Yeah, well I will be back in town soon. The monsters have asked me to come help on a production at some point and I think we should all get together again then.
Brandon Rice
Distributed Producer
Sounds like a good plan to me... Maybe you could help on mine as well,if they land in the same time period.
:beer:
ConspiracyPenguin
Nosey Penguin
It would be a great honor. Does this mean you actually promise to finish one this time?
:evil:
The films ratings changed and one film's rankings changed from round one to round two because there were more, i.e. additional, i.e. different, ratings to consider along with those already in place.
Ratings from round 1 were not changed / altered as has been stated many times. The sample size was just increased and films that had been viewed less got more views evening out their sample size to more closely match films that had tons of views.
If that causes a film to rate lower or higher ... well ain't that just life? You're getting a bigger sample foiks. You should be ... should be really stoked about that, not creating smoking guns whole cloth out of ... nothing really.
The change in ratings and the one change in ranking just worked out that way.
Dunno why this was even questioned. What's so out there about another random sampling having a SLIGHTLY different opinion.
This is the most accurate representation of what the members wanted / chose we've ever had. We've been doing this for 3 years on this scale and have (finally) put all of that experience into play for this system.
Sheesh.
Ratings from round 1 were not changed / altered as has been stated many times. The sample size was just increased and films that had been viewed less got more views evening out their sample size to more closely match films that had tons of views.
If that causes a film to rate lower or higher ... well ain't that just life? You're getting a bigger sample foiks. You should be ... should be really stoked about that, not creating smoking guns whole cloth out of ... nothing really.
The change in ratings and the one change in ranking just worked out that way.
Dunno why this was even questioned. What's so out there about another random sampling having a SLIGHTLY different opinion.
This is the most accurate representation of what the members wanted / chose we've ever had. We've been doing this for 3 years on this scale and have (finally) put all of that experience into play for this system.
Sheesh.
ConspiracyPenguin
Nosey Penguin
Well said, Jack! :thumbsup:
Another reason one films rating might fluctuate more than another's - that film had less views in round 1. 02 or RPDM will only have a few more views / ratings than they did in Round 1, because almost everyone had seen these "hits".
If your film was a "sleeper" - a great film that slowly gains a following, then you would have less views in round 1 and much more in round two. The percentage of new viewers for a Sleeper will be much larger than the percentage of new viewers for a Hit even though the hit may have more viewers total. But since the percentage of new data is much less for a hit than a sleeper you might see less fluctuation in round 2.
For the "hits" it's clearly a draw. For the "sleepers" it's good or bad for you personally depending on the opinion of the new viewers. But for the fest it's more fair because you have a larger sample.
Sorry to maybe stir something up in my last post, but been away from my computer, but given the available data - there's just not enough "discrepancy" here for something to smell fishy or like an error or to call the system as a whole into question whether you agree with the results or not.
If your film was a "sleeper" - a great film that slowly gains a following, then you would have less views in round 1 and much more in round two. The percentage of new viewers for a Sleeper will be much larger than the percentage of new viewers for a Hit even though the hit may have more viewers total. But since the percentage of new data is much less for a hit than a sleeper you might see less fluctuation in round 2.
For the "hits" it's clearly a draw. For the "sleepers" it's good or bad for you personally depending on the opinion of the new viewers. But for the fest it's more fair because you have a larger sample.
Sorry to maybe stir something up in my last post, but been away from my computer, but given the available data - there's just not enough "discrepancy" here for something to smell fishy or like an error or to call the system as a whole into question whether you agree with the results or not.
Mark Harris
Pain in the ass
I sure am glad you're getting nice and cranky for your trip back to the East Coast
I'm back as of this morning - probably explains it.