Loading... (0:00)
To our faithful listeners,

We've decided to formally shutdown thesixtyone.com -- our servers will go offline at midnight, May 1st 2017.

Artist tipping and music purchases will be functional until then, so please spend any remaining credits by month's end. 
A final payment will be made to artists following the shutdown.

thesixtyone was our baby for most of our twenties. We're incredibly sorry we weren't able to keep things going in the 
right direction.


Thank you for being a part of it.


James Miao & Samuel Hsiung

Leaderboard adjustments [locked]

Glenn Case
level 20
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 19 mar 08 12:46 p.m.
Just to clarify, I only have 256 listeners as far as people that have added my songs. I have been keeping a database of bumps, and 596 people have bumped my songs for a total of 10,420 bumps.

There's also a grammatical typo in the above post. It should read 'I wouldn't be able to share it on this site.'


Glenn Case

reply »

level 36
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 19 mar 08 2:49 p.m.
I'd also like to know what this "wide range of metadata" includes. If it makes things more fair, I'm all for it. But I'd also like to know how I can support my favorite artists.

reply »

level 33
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 19 mar 08 3:15 p.m.
come to think about it in real life I'd rather have 10 loyal listener then 100 listening "only" fans.

b/ that 100 listener may bring me up to homepage 1 time, but I might become a one time only artist. Therefore if I want to satisfy my 100 listener I need to make sure I create the same stuff that what got me that 1st 100. That would make me loose interest and reason in creating music at all.

that 100 listener wouldn't bring me more listener, unless I spend some money on marketing and publishing.

now compared that to the 10 loyal fans. They ussually become my fan because they understand my art, and they would make an effort to understand my art directions. So eventhough my style of music per album would change (ie: silverchair) I can express my art freely. Having to know that that 10 loyal fans will support me.

If at one time I made a wrong art direction, that 100 would just vanish, but those 10 will stay there encouraging me to start again, and supporting me through out.

that loyal 10 would grow, because they are the ones that are passionately promoting my art, making another listener becomes mny loyal 10. So sooner or later I would have 100 loyal listener.

that is how U2 is still one of the biggest active band til now.

that is how I enter this T61 site. After I become familiar with the system and sees it as a great medium of opportunity, I start to put the site as my tag in my Email. inviting my g/f, brothers, and close friends that support me in my music in real life, to come and support me. As you probably noticed if you know my artist account; TejoZ

I don't see anything wrong with that, that is how you would want to make it in real life, gather your "Loyal 10"

anyway back to T61 I know that the 100 listener that you may bump you just b/ you're a safe net, your song will go more then 200 bumps for sure. so if you have that 100 listener everytime you uploaded a song you would definately at least get a 50 points start up and will get you to the activity list. However that is just wrong, that dissolve the whole thing. That means they're just bumping for the song, and you can push the mute button and still be able to do that.

I would rather have my Loyal 10 promote my songs, and bump my songs passionately!

thats all
(^^ )
i noticed a very long one! haha

reply »

level 15
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 1:39 a.m.
I joined this site a month ago and have enjoyed it so far.
I did spend a lot of time on it and got Zuba to a decent level
Yesterday I received an email congratulating us to get to level 14 and when I logged in, we were back to level 11 and we dropped from 7249 down to 3974... that's almost half our points... 15th in the leaderboard 2 days ago, 46th today...

What have I done wrong??? From what I understand here, I just played too hard and did manage to get some of those "10 listeners instead 100" you are talking about...
Fair enough that the rules have to change but like miktoronto said I don't find really fair not to get any notice BEFORE the changes take place, just to have to be confronted to them (BTW thank you for changing the faq page at last!)

When I go on the leaderboard I'm struck by sthg. Before this change we had gone in front of bands like Daft Punk, Radiohead, State Radio etc... Those bands (their record companies -or blogs- I should say) have just uploaded 1 or 3 tunes and left them there for month to grow up without any interactivity with any of their listeners and without even looking at t61 since they've uploaded...
So, here's my question is that fair on indies artists of the like of Levi Weather, (who, everytime he uploads a song every single of his listeners say woooow, that's another great tune!?! really enjoy your stuff man) how can this guy not have people doing all that boring internet promotion for him??? why does choose to spend hours giving away his tunes to t61 listeners instead of uploading one once he's famous, just for the fun of it???
Personnaly, I don't think Daftpunk should be here AT ALL!

Because you're looking for a fairer way of classifiying please take in account how much artists are playing this game and are WORKING on it to try to get recognised by an indie audience
Maybe you could do a leaderboard for bands that are part of thesixtyone and an other for bands that have an company uploading tunes for them. I'm sure on your stats you can see those (Madeleine peyroux for ex uploaded one song just to promote her album and never answered a single comment, it's just pure promo... don't get me wrong, I love what she does, but I don't think it's fair to see "her" going up the ladder when she doesn't probably even know the t61 exists!)

Well like everybody I have to accept the rules and wait and see if I get new listeners, bumps and go up 3 levels without being able to upload any new songs, which btw is the only way to get attention now since all our songs have been posted already.

I had a problem for a month now... I needed to spend less time on my pc, so, thank you, this problem is sorted now
Thanks to all our supporters here, thanks to have asked us to do an interview for www.maxbumps.net and sorry to KosmikRay, since we won't be able to join the upload party because I don't want to delete any of our songs...

Sorry if I sound a bit annoyed, but I'm glad I manage to avoid swearing!!!

On a more positive note I will conclude by...


reply »

level 30
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 2:37 a.m.
As a listener, I've started taking off my playlists all the artists that are here only virtualy!
Big Ears / Zuba

reply »

level 13
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 6:46 a.m.
OK, I've calmed down. Well, I had until I reread yesterday's forum stuff again, but I'm still calmer.
I was trying to figure out why I'm so upset, and I think I know. Not sure I can explain it clearly, but here goes.

This place lists itself as the playlist of democracy. Democracy's big benefit over dictatorship was never that it made better decisions....often it doesn't...but that the populous has ownership over the decisions...and the system they produce. This ownership engenders the respect that allows the modern democratic society to function better than even the most benevolent dictatorship.
Yesterday, it became more obvious to me that this is a dictatorship. A very very benevolent and well guided one, but nevertheless, a dictatorship. We're well polled, so that the decisions are broadly in line with what the community wants, but the actual decisions are made in an opaque way that we aren't told about. There are apparently problems that need fixing and require that the powers-that-be change things for our own good. It's better if we don't know how our input is used etc.
Now...don't get me wrong...I believe this is a very benevolent dictatorship. A great place has been built, by hard working people with the good of their creation at heart. It's a great place to visit and hang out.
It's just that it's their place, not mine. I just feel disenfranchised. It's not a biggie, and I'll adjust. I'll still find music I like. I won't check the leader board (only place in there I checked frequently was listeners to see where I was anyway). When I find a group I like I'll find the myspace page where I can get their stuff instead of worrying about what level they get to. This is still a great resource for finding stuff, and I would encourage bands to get an account here, and I would encourage listeners to peruse the listings too. I'm just not going to call it a democracy....decisions are too opaque.

A note on forums...It's great that the lads have put a forum on announcements and make announcements here. It would be nice if they answered the questions that arise in those forums. It's a big job smoothing the ruffled feathers of as many users as they have here, I understand...just sayin.

One more note. I'm not a politics type and may not have used my words correctly etc. In fact, this physics geek's head hurts now from using so many words with nary a number in sight.

reply »

level 17
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 8:29 a.m.
This is a website - a completely free service provided to all of us, for which I am very grateful.

"Playlist of democracy" refers to the fact that we, the listeners, vote on the MUSIC - not on the inner workings of the site.

Having said that, it would be nice to have those inner workings explained more clearly.

reply »

level 26
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 8:42 a.m.
Uh-huh.... I've been on the side of Sam and James through a few controversial changes to stuff on this site, but this one's a sticking point. I'm with FlashG on the point about democracy, but maybe that isn't really the point - this site's a business and I don't bank on it to pay my mortgage, so maybe we should remember that too. But even if we ain't voters here, we are customers (both listeners and artists) .... and that makes us important too, yes - albeit in a different way?

What I really can't understand is why it's necessary to make major changes without making clear what those changes are and the rationale behind them before they're made. Like others commenting in this thread, I don't get what the problem was, and therefore don't understand the solution. And Lyzie may be right about the ability of a small number of players to game the leaderboard - but so what? Yes maybe some people can or have gamed their position by using the system in unintended ways - but I reckon the effect would be pretty shortlived, and as the site grows, it gets harder for small groups of artists/listeners to have a disproportional effect.

What counts is that artists can upload their music and listeners can listen - the leaderboards and league tables can be a bit of a distraction from that, but they don't change that essential truth, whatever's been done by whoever. I've max bumped stuff that I know'll never top the hot page, and maybe put it on the browse activity page for 2 hours, without anyone else chipping in - because I LIKED IT....

Someone might have their day in the sun through a loophole in the rules, but next week normality resumes, unless someone's prepared to game their whole points stack pushing someone to the top. And even if they are, that's surely because they thought the music was good enough to do that...... So what was broke and needed fixing?

But the main point surely is that whatever side of the argument you're on, it wouldn't have hurt anyone to explain in advance of changes that were intended, why, and what effect it would have.... whether you call it market research or courtesy to customers. I don't know the details of Suzen Juel's situation precisely, but for how many days was she asking WTF was going on without getting a reply? Was that necessary? Did that help the situation?

OK - so we are where we are now.... there are some winners and some losers, and there's probably as much trouble in going back, as keeping going forward now. But if something big's gonna change in the future, FFS tell us and ask us what we think first - even if you still do it anyway, at least we get what is happening.......

reply »

level 39
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 8:57 a.m.
Why not have two ways of looking at the artist leaderboards: (1) Raw number of bumps and (2) the new "normalized" number of bumps. Artists can have two metrics on their artist page, total number of bumps and their normalized score. Both of these are valid metrics of how well an artist is being heard and liked on t61. Artist level could still be tied to the normalized score, but the total number of bumps does indicate fanbase support. We already have different ways of viewing individual songs (ie. total bumps, comments, activity etc) so having multiple ways of looking at how well an artist is doing seems like a logical extension of the current system.

reply »

level 13
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 9:13 a.m.
For me I could not possibly care less what the leaderboard says. It was a cute distraction. What I cared about was the effect artists' points have on their ability to upload more songs. Bumps should determine that in a transparent way. They used to.

reply »

level 15
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 9:31 a.m.
The only issue here (for us anyway) is when you can upload again.
When the "change" happened we had just past level 14 and therefore where able to join KosmikRay's upload party on Sunday
but now, we might join one in 2 month time since we have to level up 3 times before we can upload again!!!

I'm totally with FlashG and MikeGreen on the dictatorship sorry guys! Thanks guys to be so much on the artists side and not only think about your points, because apparently this site is about music

If you change the rules fair enough but you can't make them retroactive, it is not fair to send me an email (even if automated) saying: "congrats, you're now level 14 and you can upload a new song" and not send me ANY info or a sorry to explain HOW and WHY I've lost 3 levels and almost half my points and can't actually upload tunes probably ever, unless I delete a lot of them or start a new account.

I might be wrong but I can't really picture what would happen if you were to change the rules and take half the points and level down half the top listeners, just randomly...

It's funny that when you have had a bug and lost a few points as a listener, you just have to email support and it's fixed in 2 days at the most and when you have artists asking (begging should I say) only to be explained the rules of a game they play there's nothing but a big silence...

reply »

level 15
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 9:33 a.m.
transparency is definitely the key of democracy!

reply »

level 36
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 9:47 a.m.
I'm not sure why it is felt that the formula for artists levels and ranking is now secret but I will point something out:

A web2.0 site is not about the back-end code or even the nifty html and CSS in the browser. The reason Digg is still digg even though a million different sites have tried to copy it: Community. The moment you start loosing your community is the moment you loose everything no matter how good your site is at a technical level.

It seems that this change has effected a lot of artists that were very active on the site. If they leave and take there music with them, whose music will we listen to/discover?

reply »

Alyse Black
level 17
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 9:47 a.m.
I appreciate you trying to normalize the system, but I really don't understand how the new system works and, therefore, how is improves the site and community around the site. I have recommended theSixtyOne to artists and listeners, put links up to this site on other sites, and come back to this site multiple times a day.

I just lost 1600 points - and I have 11 songs up, all of which have done really quite decently. I *was* really excited about putting up songs and sharing. I was putting up more songs on this site than I was putting up on any other site, stuff that isn't available elsewhere at all, and now the value of offering those on the internet openly seems to have been diminished. (I want to share them, but I haven't yet gone completely Creative Commons.)

This is pretty frustrating. I hope it works out. How does the new algorithm contribute to the community?

Thank you so much for the awesome site otherwise.
Much appreciation and good wishes,

reply »

level 30
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 9:56 a.m.
Thank you very much for your comment, because that's exactly how I feel about it, I know it is stupid and I shouldn't but I just feel I want to retire.
I think it's probably because I am here to share something which is part of me, my music and I'm enjoying sharing it for the love of it to people that seem to love to take their share of it, and now, some kind of god is telling no you can't share anymore because our stats tell us you've cheated!

When they manage to make you unable to bump your own songs, I felt that was fair and didn't desperately find a way to do it (because there are artists still doing it, no blame there at all :D) but here it's a huge disappointement and disbelief

reply »

level 30
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 9:57 a.m.
Just to avoid confusion I am the Zuba listeners "side"

reply »

level 41
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 10:26 a.m.
Out of curiosity, will the new system allow for the artists in the lessor listened to genres, such as classical, jazz, regge(like Conrad Tao, Mark LePine, Zuba) to level up for new uploads and not have to "compete" for equal number of bumps to level up for downloads with the likes of Chris Merrit, Hot Bitch Arsenal, Band of Horses etc.
Each artist I've named are artists I chose to mention because I really enjoy and have been introduced to their music for the first time here on the 61, but they have very different listeners and vastly different bump totals and I'm wondering how this effects their leveling up and ability to download new music.
It did appear in the old system to look like it was only based on total bumps, and by this making it more difficult for the artists in the smaller genres to upload music as fast as the more popular genres, but I may have been mistaken in how I saw that.

reply »

level 26
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 10:37 a.m.
Again with FlashG on all those points. Another thing that struck me is that now the leaderboard (for whatever that matters) is determined by other data as well as bumps - I guess this means 'adds' and 'listens' - these things don't cost the listener any points. That makes activities designed to manipulate someone up the list is cost and risk free. At least if you bump to manipulate, not only is it transparent as FlashG says.... you're only spending the points you've earned and are limited by the level you've reached.

Any system you guys bring in will be open to manipulation by one means or another if people want to manipulate it - and hey actually - I don't really care if people do want to. All that'll happen is that the algorithms'll get more and more opaque and complex, to outpace each new attempt to manipulate, until no-one knows how anything works any more. And it'll still be manipulated anyway......

So please don't try to keep changing how this all works.... it'd only be like getting into a pissing contest with a dog

reply »

Spinning Mule
level 12
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 11:39 a.m.
Having been here for a month and seeing what it has done for many artist in promoting their music it is shame that the administrators of the site could not have warned us their using public of the pending changes. I see many are upset inculuding myself over loosing rank , loosing points, not getting credit for bumps. Too many issues
Looking at 4 pages of comments i woudl think you are working on it now and wil fix it soon , perhaps a public response today would be a good thing.
Peace and Love
Your Pals at Spinning Mule ( Scott )

reply »

level 39
Re: Leaderboard adjustments | 20 mar 08 1:09 p.m.
I actually do not think that artists should be limited to a set number of uploads based on any metric of what their "level" is. It seems like the goals of the site would be best served if artists were allowed to upload as many songs as they like. It is their music after all.

reply »

« back to announcements