Home | Wiki | Live Chat | Dev Stream | YouTube | Archived Forums | Contact

The Car Shopping Round (Round 64): Tears in Heaven


#9430

here ya go :stuck_out_tongue:

The Elt : BM Sparrow S

thecarlover : CM Erie EL

TR8R : FOA Trident S

JohnWaldock : JHW Alsace 1.6L

nialloftara : Centauri Marauder V6 CPV

doncornaldie : XV Turbo

VicVictory : Ardent Smoke GT

Nomade0013: Gamma Nara STX

NormanVauxhall : Znopresk Zap 1.7 Super S

DoctorNarfy : Shromet Interval GTX

LinkLuke : LLA Bandit S Premium

vmo : Montes Urban MRP 2.0 Turbo (Urban Mk 3)

bastormonger : Walcroft&Riley Sabre SS

conan : BKOO Sentio HP-S

HighOctaneLove : Bogliq Coyote SR

LordLetto : Letto Compagno

abg7 : SMG Taikan II +2


#9431

Check the quotes.


#9432

You’ve got the wrong person’s stuff quoted under me.


#9433

whoops. sorry. i was just copying what the browser said it was on, and not double checking. sorry :stuck_out_tongue:

edit : should be fixed now… if i didn’t miss anything else


#9434

@strop - I’ve a suggestion for a rule change. If a challenge gets canned, like this one, then it reverts to the 2nd place of the previous round…or 3rd, etc.

I don’t see how a poll can do justice for a winner when it’s the whole car and not just an advert that counts. Because a cool advert is more likely to get more votes than just a picture with a price.

I’m not in any way thinking I had a chance but my advert was shit! :rofl:


#9435

I agree with that.


#9436

I also agree - the car itself matters most, no matter how simple or complicated its ad is.


#9437

I support this comment only because I just realized I came 2nd the last round. :stuck_out_tongue:

Joking aside. I want to express that I am able to host the next round. I also already have a few ideas and the time to do it. But of course it depends on the community if that’s okay or not.


#9438

i’d say voting just based by ad sounds pretty reasonable to me, as an ad is part of your effort that you put into the entry as a whole, and not just the car, just as much as the appearance of the car itself.
an ad doesn’t even have to be that amazing. just tidy and well done in showing the cars.

though that said, both ways are pretty legit ways imo.

pros and cons for both methods

like the voting method, which i prefer, does end up based on pure ads and car looks only, and would tend to be biased to people that does well done ads consistently. though again in my view, i see the ad as part of your entry effort nowadays


#9439

It is part of the entry, however it is far from the whole thing.

Praising cars just because of looks or the effort they put into a photoshop is not as valid a result as awarding them back to the runner-ups from the previous round.

I’d suggest conan, as the last 2nd place, to hold duties for CSR 59.


#9440

I’ll weigh in as well with rewarding the previous round’s runner-up in the event of a round failure.

If we go purely by ‘repost the ads,’ it turns into “who spent the most time in Photoshop” and not “Who built the better car” which takes away from the core of the Car Shopping Round, which is to build the better car.

However, going by the runners-up of the previous round, they’ve already proven they know how to make a good car, not just a pretty picture. And it takes out the other problem with “vote on the ads” that comes up: How to keep it from being a popularity contest.

After all, any community, whether small or large, focused or unfocused, has ‘popular’ members and ‘unpopular’ members. And more importantly, the problem with voting on the ad, in my opinion, is that it rewards a different set of skills with an easy path to victory. No one’s going to care if the car’s an utter shitbox if the ad looks awesome, and likewise, no one’s going to vote for the best overall car if the ad is just a few Automation screenshots and a text blurb.

So, as I don’t have a horse in this race either way, I’m able to remain impartial enough to put my vote in on a rule change. Instead of immediately going to a vote on the ads, first offer it to the runners-up of the previous round. If none of the top 3 or top 5 want to take the reins, then put it up to the popularity contest.


#9441

I agree that an ads competiton is unfair. The cars must be evaluated by their stats, not their ads.

A spreadsheet with all the stats should be posted, and voted on that basis.

If not possible I will prefer to give the “round tsar” title to the 2nd arrived in the previous round.


#9442

Problem here is that the winner is a combination of looks and stats. And the looks are personal to the Roundmaster.

So cars cannot be evaluated by anyone other than the Roundmaster.


#9443

I will leave my opinion: This is a contest, based on a person looking for a car, and other person we deliver a car that meets the requested requirements. And we sent it to you. That is, it values ​​something more than the design (which is also something personal), in addition to the work applied to the car. how can suspension, comfort, dynamics … Not in “the one that makes the best edition” or “the best advertisement”. Because that is pure marketing to attract the customer’s attention. In other words, it is a competition that searches for the car the customer is looking for, not an advertising contest. What I mean by this? That I do not see fair to choose the winner as it has been done. For that, either extra time is given to the one who takes the round, or it is passed to the second contestant.


#9444

I also tend to think that a thread poll isn’t representative - it’s essentially a different format in pretty much every way: A jury of actual forum members replaces a fictional individual, decision based on an ad rather than the entirety of the car etc. etc., though as with the roundmaster unavailable, a “valid” resolution cannot be achieved anyway, I daresay that perhaps fairness and such shouldn’t even be considered priorities.

As I understand it, the thread poll is just a fallback plan to keep the CSR from seizing solid. So as fallback plans go, I’m in favor of voiding the round and handing roundmaster duties to the runner-up of the previous challenge mainly because it makes a cleaner cut, is simpler and speeds the process up a bit.

On another note: I think the round count has skipped a number, I’m pretty sure we’re at round 57, not 58…


#9445

Yup, it’s 57 for sure. Unless this one and the previous three were wrongly numbered by their hosts (I didn’t check further back).

Edit: fixed the number in the title then. I hope nobody has anything against.


#9446

It sounds as if there is fairly unanimous agreement with this suggested rule change.

It also sounds as if people would be happier if I ignored the results of this current poll (I have not seen the results so I’m blinded and therefore unbiased), and went straight to applying this new rule change effective immediately.

So before I say let’s do such a thing (I’ll give it 24 hours),

Are there any objections? Speak now or forever hold your peace.


#9447

Apply the rule!


#9448

I also want this rule to be applied.


#9449

+1 Apply the Rule

Viewing the Results on our End:
24 Voters
1st) @NormanVauxhall 42%
2nd) @thecarlover 17%
3rd) @abg7 9%
4th ) @conan 8%
6 way tie for 5th at 4%, 0% Below them.