/tnt/ - Tournaments & Events

This board is for hosting tournaments and other organized competitions, be it either events, contests, or anything where a winner must be determined through votes or otherwise. Just for this board, image duplicates are enabled and the bump limits are set extra high. Roleplaying is encouraged, unless event hosts ask otherwise.


Thread stats: 50 posts, 10 files (10 image(s))

Toggle poster info Replying to /tnt/69004 Close window
Options
No.69004
Voter base IQ discussionAnonymous
save file
image:170011769791.jpg(61kB , 720x874 , 5f5ea71acf92860fa8a3405af668bdd3.jpg)
Some discussion was brought up about this in the Queen /v/ 2023 tournament, and I wanted to make a thread here as it was fun to think about.
Which tournament voter base has the highest IQ?
Majority of the Queen threads held the belief that King had the dumbest voters, their evidence for this was King voters accepting and voting in favor of the loser bracket. This then led to some anons jokingly, or unjokingly, stating that /co/ voters were actually smarter than /v/ voters for voting against a loser bracket. Then evidence was thrown around saying actually Ms. /co/ has dumb voters due to not having good winners. Which was countered by some saying that due to Ms. /co/ having the most strategic voting out of any tournament, and at times having 8 different simultaneous layers of false flagging at play that Ms. /co/ has actually the smartest voters.
How would you rank each voter base in terms of intelligence?
No.69008
Anonymous
Replies:>>69010
>>69004
>and at times having 8 different simultaneous layers of false flagging at play that Ms. /co/ has actually the smartest voters.
Ms. /co/'s falseflagging only works because of NSA's stupidity. Anyway, considering Queen gave King the whitelist and King gave them the Loser's Bracket as well as both not knowing what a video game is with what they approved on the whitelist, I think they are equally slow.
No.69009
Anonymous
I voted in all the tournaments. This means I'm simultaneously the smartest and dumbest voter alive.
No.69010
Anonymous
Replies:>>69035
>>69008
The whitelist Queen approved around a year ago is not the same to the one we have now.
save file
image:170014953290.jpg(87kB , 1300x957 , TF2DevMan.jpg)
>>69004
Everyone is fucking retarded; the voters, the hosts, the mods, literally everyone.
No.69035
Anonymous
Replies:>>69036
>>69010
They still voted back in everyone this year.
No.69036
Anonymous
Replies:>>69040
>>69035
The hosts never showed us the stats, right?
Replies:>>69038
save file
image:170015682853.jpg(99kB , 484x400 , FqL13LKWYAAlI4x.jpg)
>>69004
Isn't a roleplayer of one of the Mr. /co/ reps a straight up doctor? That basically already puts Mr. /co/ leagues above every tournament.
No.69038
Anonymous
>>69037
you’re probably thinking of the John Silver anon who’s a psychologist, which honestly makes perfect sense
No.69039
Anonymous
Replies:>>69040
The thing with both the whitelist and loser's bracket is that voting stupidly is only part of it. Incompetent hosts and people wanting to adding new rules to a popularity contest on a Mongolian basket-weaving forum also have to do with it.
No.69040
Anonymous
>>69039
This. I was gonna question what actually brought loser's bracket up in the first place. I wasn't around for KoV 2022 so i don't know if a lot of people were asking for it. I do know that it came up occasionally among other rulefagging and added stipulations over the years in /co/ but it was never close to the most debated. Shit like 256 bracket and E8 debate got more attention. But suddenly, out of nowhere, NSA said loser's bracket was gonna be a question and tried to sneakily force in through during voting.
Which by the way reminds me as >>69036 points out the actual numbers for the last round of rule voting was never released and it's very likely NSA just added together options again for the loser's bracket, to say nothing of the whitelist. But it looks like we may be stuck with this stuff now.
No.69041
Anonymous
i fucking hate NSA
No.69042
Anonymous
>>69040
It wasn't that major in Ko/v/ last year from what I can remember. There was a much bigger push for a 256 bracket, but it got ignored by the hosts in favor of allowing non-vidya characters and losers bracket instead.
No.69043
Anonymous
Replies:>>69050
i hatefuck NSA
No.69044
Anonymous
Replies:>>69045
>>69040
>>69042
I try to give the benefit of the doubt, but that's so shady.
save file
image:170016145248.gif(74kB , 240x244 , 1667261315973.gif)
>>69040
>>69042
>>69044
>I was gonna question what actually brought loser's bracket up in the first place
Loser's bracket was at no point a big topic of discussion or a demanded alternative (at least before this year). I went back to read the archives and, by the looks of it, NSA first and only put it up to vote during the Ko/v/ finals because a single anon asked him.

https://arch.b4k.co/v/thread/621414796/#621421251
>Possible to vote on a losers bracket for next years tourney?
>NSA: No, that's just for the host to have the option of adding if possible. It's not guaranteed to happen. /v/ mods are notably laxxer than /co/. So it might be possible. I'll keep it in the back pocket to shake things up next year. I'll put a vote in just to see if people are interested in it happening as an option.

https://arch.b4k.co/v/thread/621424694/#q621426881
>Would you be open to a loser's bracket? This is not guaranteed to be done.
>-Yes
>-No

https://arch.b4k.co/v/thread/621434984/#q621435694
>NSA: A loser's bracket just means they can battle the other losers and try to battle the undefeated winner in a grand finale It's actually called a double elimination bracket. It adds on one more day to voting. Unless I alter it a bit.
>A losers bracket would help keep people around for longer since their pick might still come back.

https://arch.b4k.co/v/thread/621447445/#q621449042
>NSA: This will encourage characters who lose to compete against other losers and have the chance to recompete in the grand finals. This will help balance the randomization in the brackets, and there might even be an underdog upset. This is not guaranteed to be done next year and is up to host discretion.

Emphasis on "balance the randomization in the brackets". While this not how the final form question would end being worded, it's a quite a Freudian slip coming from NSA.
No.69046
Anonymous
>>69045
It sounds like NSA went with it because he personally liked that suggestion rather than because it was something a lot of people wanted
No.69047
Anonymous
Replies:>>69051
>>69045
>>69046
>It sounds like NSA went with it because he personally liked that suggestion rather than because it was something a lot of people wanted
Which would be the same case with last ms. /co/. In fact the one or few anons bringing it up at all is possibly him.
No.69050
Anonymous
>>69043
We know, King Kong. You don't need to brag about it.
Replies:>>69052
save file
image:170016390998.gif(5kB , 150x150 , fatotsuki.gif)
>>69046
>>69047
I think all this does is but confirm two things anyone smart enough already knew or at least suspected: one, that double elimination mostly exists as a rather clumsy band-aid to the potential drawbacks randomized seeding can represent (see: Madotsuki vs Shantae); and two, that the loser's bracket of this Queen of /v/ was specifically set up to facilitate a "miracle comeback" - not necessarily in favor of SHODAN, Ammy, Mado, Alice, or anybody else who fell into LB through the tourney, no: but for the orchestrated narrative of a 'comeback' underdog through the losers' bracket.
No.69052
Anonymous
>>69051
NSA last ms. /co/ openly rejected the idea that tourneys are popularity contest (said it was for OC and finding new stuff or some shit). All these rule measures pretty clearly favorite keeping up thread engagement above all else. Between that and raw voting data being hidden every round the jokes about tourneys being like booked wrestling promotions may be truer than most think.
No.69053
Anonymous
Replies:>>69087
>>69052
As a campaigner, I hate this. We need to get rid of NSA.
No.69054
Anonymous
>>69052
if NSA wanted to increase engagement he’d step down as host
No.69056
Anonymous
>>69052
NSA can go fuck himself.
No.69059
Anonymous
>>69052
>the jokes about tourneys being like booked wrestling promotions may be truer than most think.
Those wrestling streams someone did for Queen and King last year feel more legitimate than the tournaments at this point
No.69089
Anonymous
Replies:>>69361
>>69087
/tnt/ likes to complain
No.69102
Anonymous
>>69087
Every new host that we've gotten doesn't seem to want to coup nsa
No.69114
Anonymous
>>69087
A lot don't know how to host. That's why we keep begging for new hosts instead of taking the job ourselves. There's also the fear of thread deletion because you have to talk with mods before you do these tournaments and most don't know what to say without pissing them off.
No.69115
Anonymous
>>69087
It's a thankless job.
save file
image:170018475757.jpg(45kB , 694x693 , 1E2073D0-77C7-4BC4-956B-8BF7701E9C83.jpeg)
>>69087
NSA even as a practical host is really subpar.
It takes him about an hour or more to create and post the results which means hours wasted on what could’ve potentially be some result changing votes.

Statsanon literally created and posted results within minutes.
No.69122
Anonymous
Replies:>>69195
>>69118
That's because Stats presumably didn't check for rigging, which is reasonable as it's essentially guesswork.
No.69126
Anonymous
Replies:>>69195
>>69118
taking time to check the votes is fine, people just need to stop losing their shit over every minor happening.
No.69140
Anonymous
Replies:>>69195
>>69118
It's that or we just ignore rigging
No.69181
Anonymous
>>69087
There's been a history of certain nefarious autists sneaking in multiple times and trying to hijack, leading to natural distrust of newcomers. Plus NSA apparently has a vetting process and its up to him who runs the tourney as he talks to mods. So that alongside being a thankless and super autistic task, it's not so simple as just going 'okay now I will host the /co/ or /v/.'
No.69195
Anonymous
Replies:>>69255
>>69122
>>69126
>>69140
Stats had specific programs that did most of the work for him in the sheets and google forms. That's why he could create and post results within minutes.
No.69197
Anonymous
>>69040
>it's very likely NSA just added together options again for the loser's bracket, to say nothing of the whitelist. But it looks like we may be stuck with this stuff now.
oh my fucking god you're right
that would explain so much
No.69222
Anonymous
I’ll maintain that /v/ is dumber than /co/, not that /co/ is smart by any means. It’s just that /v/ is so retarded trying to have an on topic discussion there is almost impossible.
No.69255
Anonymous
>>69195
No one ever actually figured that out. If he had programs why wouldn't he release them at any point?
No.69256
Anonymous
>>69045
>one more day
>drawn out by two
Just adds that the whole losers' finals was a mistake.
No.69260
Anonymous
Replies:>>69281
>>69255
He did use programs and just didn't foresee other people hosting I guess
https://desuarchive.org/co/search/text/python/username/stats%20anon/type/posts/order/asc/
No.69263
Anonymous
Replies:>>69909
>>69255
He probably would've if his life wasn't unfortunately cut short before he had the chance to release them
God have mercy on Statsanon's soul
save file
image:170022245130.jpg(290kB , 747x769 , D1B3B8A7-1976-4455-9CD4-F648A1889CC3.jpeg)
>>69260
I hate how competent he sounds compared to our current hosts.
No.69361
Anonymous
>>69089
Fitting anons from /co/ and /v/.
No.69827
Anonymous
>>69004
This next King /v/ will decide where everyone should rank.
No.69909
Anonymous
>>69263
Was there ever actual any concrete evidence he died? He could’ve just flat out left for all I know
No.70194
Anonymous
I want to kill NSA.
No.70195
Anonymous
>>70194
Based
save file
image:170093947176.jpg(30kB , 452x640 , Garcian Smith.jpg)
>>70194
Get in line. I got first dibs on him.