◄|
|►
Loading... (0:00)
thesixtyone is a music discovery game that connects artists and fans
Sign up to begin your musical adventure
Topic:

Bump cost changes. [locked]


ImOnlySleeping
level 39
Re: Bump cost changes. | 18 dec 07 12:43 p.m.
I would say that dealing with the signed artists is less of a problem.

I would suggest using a combination of the both the listener's & the artist's current points/level as a scale for bumping purposes (in addition to the existing early bumps cost more/reward more). You could fool around with the weighting of each value (the listener's probably being the bigger factor)

This should reduce people sitting on the browse - new songs section (guilty) and of people voting for popular artists that they aren't huge fans of (also guilty. How was I going to pass up Lilly Allan?). Most of the time I'm just looking for good music, but you can sky rocket the points by placing bets on sure things.

PS It is a great thing that you've done here.

reply »


ImOnlySleeping
level 39
Re: Bump cost changes. | 18 dec 07 12:56 p.m.
oh ya, I forgot while I was going on there.
But scaling this while keeping a revive constant for all artists & all listeners would also make reviving a more palatable option.

reply »


hawkeyejoes
level 24
Re: Bump cost changes. | 18 dec 07 2:22 p.m.
I don't know if this is exactly what you are suggesting, but I could really get behind the idea of higher level artists being more expensive to bump. This would somewhat address the issue of big name bands getting all the attention (not completely, but nothing will completely level the playing field; that's why they have big names).

This is similar to the suggestion I made a week ago of the point system being flipped on its head, with early bumps actually being cheaper and the bump reward curve being flattened to one point per bump. That way, you earn more points just by virtue of being early to the party. This would discourage Iron and Wine from getting 600+ bumps and ENCOURAGE the discover of unknowns, which is ultimately the point of this site (in my mind, at least).

reply »


schmexplosives
level 13
Re: Bump cost changes. | 18 dec 07 3:42 p.m.
I think that the idea of higher level artists being more expensive to bump would be very difficult to implement, as one would have to draw the line somewhere in a gray area between high low level. There would be disagreements over certain bands, and it doesn't seem to be much of a problem (yet). Also, as someone else mentioned, "high level" artists' record labels don't usually allow for their songs to be posted on sites such as this, with unlimited plays, etc.

reply »


ImOnlySleeping
level 39
Re: Bump cost changes. | 18 dec 07 4:07 p.m.
The level is already calculated on the leaders page (due to past bumps). Indie or signed wouldn't make a difference.

reply »


hawkeyejoes
level 24
Re: Bump cost changes. | 18 dec 07 4:53 p.m.
Right, the leveling system is already in place. If you leverage that, then you would not have to worry about drawing arbitrary lines about signed vs unsigned.

reply »


eatabagel
level 21
Re: Bump cost changes. | 18 dec 07 10:35 p.m.
If you were to make "Higher Level" Bands a more expensive bump for all then you would limit the potential of the users that don't have as many points to bump those bands.

I suggest that the higher the level of the band the more points they would need to reach the home page. Thus allowing the bands that have less exposure to get there in the same amount of time or sooner.

reply »


james
level 21
Re: Bump cost changes. | 19 dec 07 12:29 a.m.
eatabagel: I like your thinking regarding homepage requirements based on artist level, but you also have to remember that our adjustments would also need to address that fact that it's ridiculously easy to earn points bumping new songs from established/popular artists on thesixtyone. Therefore, it's not just about leveling the playing field amongst musicians, but also keeping the game aspect of the site fairly balanced.

reply »


thisisgil
level 14
Re: Bump cost changes. | 19 dec 07 6:19 a.m.
Just to play devil's advocate, it's not just Signed / known acts that are going to rocket up the charts, but the proliferation of cover versions as well.

Now, from a personal point of view, I've bumped a few covers here and then because I thought they were well arranged and brought something new to the song. However, there is a trend in the music industry as a whole at the moment for little known indie groups to release "ironic" covers of dance / electro / R&B; / pop music. This is reflected on thesixtyone by the fairly large number of covers that are cropping up, and I can't help but notice that these all seem to hit the hot list eventually. Is it possible that these are being bumped based on the popularity of the source material, rather than the attributes of the cover version? If so, are cover versions just as much an issue as the whole signed / unsigned thing?

I guess it all boils down to there being two ways to "play" thesixtyone:

1) Some people are really getting a kick out of playing "Be the A&R; man" and trying to discover new acts with the hope that they reach the hot list

2) Some people are playing for points. That means bump anything by a well known / signed band, bump any new tracks by an artist that has already been successful in the hot list irrespective the moment they are posted, and bump any cover versions of well-loved / popular songs. This way to play the game is less about subjective opinions, and more about points gathering.

Neither way is wrong, but both ways really counterract each other when the results are shoe-horned into a hot chart, and it seems that currently more people are playing for points. This is a trend that has started since thesixtyone made it big on Digg, and exactly what I'd expect to see from all of the Mac fan-b... uh I mean Digg fanatics ;)

Maybe another solution is to offer two "types" of points: Bump and fan points? If you like a signed band, and they are on thesixtyone, you can use one of your fan points to bump them. However, if you want to boost an unsigned act, you can still discover / bump as before.

This could lead to three separate charts: A signed chart (using fan points), an unsigned chart (using bumps/discoveries), and possibly a combined chart, which is the same as the current hot chart.

This method would lead to a slight bit more complication, but I believe it would offer a really nice unobtrusive way to give equal exposure to signed and unsigned acts, AND allow people to play the game either for points, or discovering bands, and reward both types of player equally.

reply »


eatabagel
level 21
Re: Bump cost changes. | 19 dec 07 7:17 a.m.
I can imagine it will be increasingly difficult to keep the balance between Artist and Players so to that I would suggest diminishing returns for those that bump the same artist over and over. This would allow people that are new to the site a little push in closing the gap between those of us that have been here. This would also help keep the homepage competitive as people would really have to enjoy the song in order to bump it.

I know that this doesn't completely correlate with the issue at hand but I thought it so I typed it. ;P

reply »


maxpower
level 18
Re: Bump cost changes. | 19 dec 07 10:59 a.m.
Why not have a side bar column on the front page that only has hot unsigned artists? you could show maybe the top ten or have it scroll the top 100 or something like that...

reply »


hawkeyejoes
level 24
Re: Bump cost changes. | 19 dec 07 11:11 a.m.
I think a fundamental issue with this argument is people are saying "signed/unsigned" instead of "signed to major labels". Because any one can start a label. I have a friend who is the founder of a label with 5 bands signed to it. But none of those bands are the bands you guys mean when you say "signed". But then where do you draw the line.

For Sam and James, gray areas mean death. Startups like this get killed in the gray area, either by legal issues or by the rules becoming to convoluted to understand and people abandonign the site.

The rules should be simple that the lines clear.

reply »


mikegreen
level 26
Re: Bump cost changes. | 19 dec 07 8:25 p.m.
I'm with hawkeyejoes on this one. Not only for the legal issues, but for the simplicity of operation by members of this community. Firstly its gotta be understood at a level where a newbie can get it and do it from the start, and then become better through experience (whether as points chaser, amateur A&R; or both). Trying to break down bump costs/rewards between famous/unknown or signed/unsigned leads to arbitrary distinctions, confusion and then disagreements.

The way I see it, this site's greatest strength is the democratic way in which users set their preferences collectively. If we, collectively, ignore good new stuff to win points bumping big name mainstreamers, we end up with a site that replicates what we can hear by turning on MTV, and we have only ourselves to blame. In just the same way we get the government we deserve in a democracy, we'll get the music we deserve if we forget the new stuff from previously unknown bands.

If anything needs to be done to give new stuff an extra chance, how about a kudos system that gives glory, rather than points to those who discover the most new music. You could say something like a track/band which has never made the billboard top 50 (is that right for the USA - I'm in the UK?) previously, would qualify.

reply »


hodj
level 14
Re: Bump cost changes. | 19 dec 07 8:37 p.m.
Tracking songs that are or have been Billboard Top 50 (correct term) would be difficult, I think. For those concerned about smaller bands not getting enough exposure, just wait… the site's still rather new and (as time passes) I'm sure the dedicated user will expand their base into bumping stuff no one's heard before.

reply »


maxpower
level 18
Re: Bump cost changes. | 19 dec 07 9:40 p.m.
I think the home page or the "hot list" should be done like this:

bump per hour * total bumps

that way if a new song is posted and within 3 hours it has 9 bumps it bump per hour will be 3. 3bph * 9 total bumps = 27

Now lets see how a song that has been around for a while does:

bump rate of .25 bumps per hour (.25 bph= 1 bump every 4 hours or 36 bumps a week) If the song has a total of 100 bumps its total score is 25.

Now the hot list looks like this:

new song total = 27
old song total= 25

----------

If we do it like this then new and old can share the hot list.

any one get my logic here?

reply »


maxpower
level 18
Re: Bump cost changes. | 19 dec 07 9:40 p.m.
I think the home page or the "hot list" should be done like this:

bump per hour * total bumps

that way if a new song is posted and within 3 hours it has 9 bumps it bump per hour will be 3. 3bph * 9 total bumps = 27

Now lets see how a song that has been around for a while does:

bump rate of .25 bumps per hour (.25 bph= 1 bump every 4 hours or 36 bumps a week) If the song has a total of 100 bumps its total score is 25.

Now the hot list looks like this:

new song total = 27
old song total= 25

----------

If we do it like this then new and old can share the hot list.

any one get my logic here?

reply »


eatabagel
level 21
Re: Bump cost changes. | 19 dec 07 9:49 p.m.
I understand it better now that you have explained it twice :)

reply »


maxpower
level 18
Re: Bump cost changes. | 19 dec 07 10:01 p.m.
thats what laptop touch pad will do sometimes :) sorry

reply »


notdoingmyjob
level 27
Re: Bump cost changes. | 20 dec 07 3:22 a.m.
Perhaps it is "unfair" when people bump major label artists only because they know they'll get points from it later but this isn't just about an artist being famous.

Nearly all my points have come from just a few tracks that had > 20 bumps within the first hour or so. I didn't know any of them and barely listened to them but I just wanted to see what would happen if I followed the crowd for a change.

You can spend hours listening for great stuff on the rack but if you simply track what's hot on the new list under browse you're pretty much guaranteed a ton of points even if you don't listen to the song.

Easy points. I'd feel bad about it but I want the points so I can bump my favourite stuff.

Maybe getting rid of the new page in browse would solve this "problem".

Then again maybe other people enjoy this aspect. I guess it depends on whether this site supposed to be light entertainment or deathly serious.

reply »


ImOnlySleeping
level 39
Re: Bump cost changes. | 20 dec 07 6:09 a.m.
I see some sort of change has happened as it cost me 53 to discover a song this morning.

reply »

« back to announcements

downloading