The First: MOC Contest Results (BIONICLE Canon Contest #1)

[ToaBion]

I am a proof that they deleted non-valid votes. I made a second account and voted because I couldn’t log in with my main account and I was afraid of not being able to log in and vote before the contest was over. A mod asked me a day after if I had made a dupe account and the reason. I told him what I just told you, they understood and removed my vote and secondary account. And I voted for entry 2.

@ToaBion

I made a second account and voted because I couldn’t log in with my main account and I was afraid of not being able to log in and vote before the contest was over. A mod asked me a day after if I had made a dupe account and the reason. I told him what I just told you, they understood and removed my vote and secondary account. And I voted for entry 2.

[ToaKebaka]

Most definitely not.

[TTheLus]

Proof of one isn’t proof of 71

[Gognad]

From where I’m sat, the poll clearly said who won, and then we got … number 2 winner! (trust me honest)(no I wont tell you who’s votes I deleted or why) :DD

[ToaBion]

Yeah, maybe. But a proof they did not only deleted unfair votes to mister noodle. I voted for the one that won (entry 2).

[Eljay]

If this is gonna be the back and forth format, I’m gonna get tired of it very quickly.

@Godzilla

The staff member disqualified it as a joke entry, and that was reversed out of good faith. That’s more or less what they say.

Our moderators did not have disqualifying allowance. Only cast members. It was deleted, but it was not formally disqualified.

@Godzilla

The main point when they mentioned the “entry that was third” seems more to be that Double’s entry was moved forward twice by audit, not from the pure votes themselves. Now, whether that is simply coincidence, or that the audited votes were legitimate and Double’s entry was pushed forward to first compete with Bendryx and then overtake it, that is up to one’s own conclusions, as obviously throughout the thread this whole thing has been discussed.

What you are suggesting is that we moved it forward by removing legitimate votes. We did not tamper with votes. Any votes we removed were determined to be fraudulent.

@Godzilla

Their statement was true. The rules for being allowed to vote were indeed changed. I do not see the issue of what they said, and although on its own such a change can be seen as one of necessity, given the fact that later on over 70 votes were removed (orders of magnitude more than the previous contest section) despite the changes being put in place specifically to prevent fraudulent accounts from being mass produced, one could instead see it as a change made to slow down new voters from tipping the polls, and one that did not work.

You’re conflating two issues here, but I suppose that comes from a lack on insight on what makes a fraudulent account. One issue was a mass of people being offered compensation if they voted that were joining in large numbers just to boost one entry. A normal account, made by a person to vote, that did not utilize fraudulent means to create said account or any others, was not discounted during the audit.

The point behind what we did was to respond to the panic that ensued once the offer on Twitter was discovered. It did not disbar legitimate persons from voting.

@Godzilla

5.It seems their mention of Double relates to the point listed earlier about how Double’s entry moved up twice only after the auditing of votes. That is admittedly a bit strange, when one considers that both you and (I believe) Meso voted for Double’s entry as well. @Sparky might be trying to say that Double was deliberately pushed forward as the build chosen to beat out Bendryx, denying the legitimate winner of Contest Nueve their place and later on winning the contest through vote manipulation, as well as being put in the finals to swiftly gain a lead and overtake Bendryx.

I’m getting quickly exhausted with this accusation that we moved Double’s MOC up because it was our preference, so I’m gonna cut to the chase:

My personal favorite entry, and the one I wanted to win over all, was ToaOfPlastic’s. After that, the one I wanted to win was Du7734’s. I had no other favorites after those two. Does that satisfy you?

@Godzilla

While it is true that no one explicitly said their own entry preferences (as far as I am aware), it is also true that at least you yourself voted for Double’s entry twice. One could argue that is a “red flag”.

Would you rather we not vote? Would you prefer I not have entries I enjoyed and got to vote on personally, as a member of the community as well? You can believe it’s a red flag, and I understand your perspective… but it’s a nothing-burger.

@Godzilla

Regardless, I still believe Sparky’s post was, for the most part, well informed

You are welcome to believe that. And I’m saying it wasn’t.

[Ohmygodiamonfire]

Honestly I think the my issue with Hoseryx isn’t the moc itself, or that it is possibly a joke entry or whatever, it’s the fact that a silly thing ultimately caused so much toxicity to spawn from it, from both supporters and haters of it.

Because as much entertainment that spawned from it, it also just produced A LOT unwarranted salt and anger over something that wasn’t even going to be the final representation of the character even if it had won.

Think it might be a good idea for all of us to take a step back and relax when it comes to these contests next time.

[TakumaNuva]

@Godzilla

If you don’t mind me asking, which one did you want to win? This is simply curiosity, as I personally wanted number 3 in Poll Nueve to win at first.

I did not engage with the contest during the first round, partly because I was too busy and partly because I’m not a fan of canonization contests. I started voting round two.

I voted for 3 in Nueve and would have been satisfied if it had won. But I think my preferred entry was #2 from Diez by @Infrared.

[Gresh113]

@Eljay

After that, the one I wanted to win was Du7734’s

An entry that legitimately lost to Bendy in the second round no I’m not still salty You’d think if Eljay was rigging the votes against Bendyryx, he’d do it back then, when a favorite was actually about to lose in the polls…

In the end, I think it comes down to “do you trust TTV?” If you do, there’s nothing to suggest that the vote was tampered with, and in fact more plausible evidence that there would be many fraudulent votes. If you don’t trust TTV, then it might be worth considering why and whether it’s on valid grounds, as well as how that might be influencing how you see the controversy.

[Godzilla]

If you wish to stop, we may stop. I do not intend to tire you out, as it were, and to be fair you (as well as many of the other moderators) should get your rest. I shall try my best to be brief.

1. That is fair, but that seems like semantics at that point. It was not formally disqualified yes, but it was literally deleted. Had it gone on deleted, I very much doubt the creator would have had any doubts as to whether it would have been allowed or not.
2. Again, I’m really just putting out what people could think. I do realize the official position on the matter itself.
3. I do realize that the limit was created soon after the reveal of the tweet, and could be seen as the reaction to that. However, this combined with the changes to votes could be seen in a different light, and the means by which a vote is considered “fraudulent” are not really even known, with answers ranging from fake emails (or disposable ones, really) to duplicate IPs to having memes as names.
   But again, I was saying how people could see it. I was not arguing that it is what happened.
4. I don’t really have any need of satisfaction. I was not arguing that it was perhaps your definitive favorite. The concept behind the argument is that Double’s MOC was decided on as the “winner” in the semifinals against Bendryx, and as such, it was pushed through by audit. And it is true that you voted for it both times. Perhaps it was not the one you wanted to win at first, but it would have been the one you wanted to win by the semifinals, or at least the one you voted for.
5. Personally, I’d rather that there be ranked, blind voting, because I can understand wanting to vote on your own contest and I don’t think it is in and of itself wrong to do so. But I was simply saying that a person who believes that the audit was incorrect could see such votes and believe that it is “proof” of intentions.

If we’re being completely honest, I’d rather a list of the audited voters be released as it would release no information as to how you audited the votes themselves. But you yourself made it clear you would not release such a list, which I accept as a conclusion. I’m just saying that to be honest.

I’m not trying to argue that these beliefs are necessarily what I feel, or even true. But I simply am arguing that, to me, they seem well informed.
I apologize if this is aggravating to you. If you wish, I shall drop the subject entirely in this thread.

@TakumaNuva That one does look really good. It’s a great entry, I recall voting for it (I think). Personally I preferred 3 more, as the shield seemed a bit too bare, but really it was very well made.

@Gresh113 I suppose the hypothetical argument is less that they specifically wanted Double’s to win the entire time, and moreso that Doubles was chosen at the semifinals because it was deemed the better looking entry that also had the best chance of winning (and looking like it won fairly), so it was planned as the winner semifinals-forward.

But, and let me stress this once more, this is hypothetical. I am not saying I hold these beliefs, nor am I trying to “throw shade” at the TTV staff. They all seem respectable and civil, and even though I may disagree with some things I personally am not squarely in a camp of not believing them.

[wumpus]

You routinely trash talked #6 Mctoran

[Gresh113]

Ok, we really don’t need to make this about individuals and what they may or may not have done…

[Eljay]

@Godzilla

I’m not trying to argue that these beliefs are necessarily what I feel, or even true. But I simply am arguing that, to me, they seem well informed.

Fair enough. Apologies if I came off as overly aggressive - I’m sure you can understand that this whole ordeal has been just that.

Thank you for your input and for providing these perspectives in a respectful manner. It is sincerely appreciated.

[Mctoran]

Even if I have, I still think the contest should be fair. I might not like certain entries but I’m not petty enough to try to rig a contest to make another entry win.
The only thing I’ve advocated for was fairness in the rules, not tipping the scales in favor of or against certain entries.

[Godzilla]

There is no need for apologies. I may not be a moderator of forums but I have had manager positions once or twice and I can (sort of) get how frustrating and difficult it is to work diligently on them.
Really, I recommend rest. For all of those involved, to be fair.
@Gresh113 I do agree, please try to keep things civil guys. Just be sure not to insult others.

[wumpus]

I’m sorry, but I’ve seen this individual routinely voice a very demeaning and disrespectful opinion towards the MOC to the point where posts have been removed. His statement was categorically false.

[Gresh113]

Be that as it may, throwing shade at them as a person, by accusing them of lying, doesn’t seem necessary in this situation. In other situations, perhaps it is important to point out when someone’s lying. But not here, not for something as simple as this…

[Mctoran]

I dont hate Hoseryx for her design, even though I dont like her appearance. But that in itself wouldn’t be enough to make me want to get it disqualified or have the contest rigged against it. What miffs me the most about Hoseryx is all the questionable things that have been done to push it ahead in the contest.

Although that may sound hypocritical since there were fraudulent votes for every entry besides 1, Hoseryx had the most so, as claimed by the data.

[Underscore]

Suggestions for future contests:

1. Put more emphasis on consistency with G1 sets and aesthetics, and the use of primarily G1 and technic parts.

2. Require that all entries for kanohi wearing characters such as Toa use a mata/metru head which can wear kanohi.

3. Include a more comprehensive character info section, with no information omitted or subjective interpretations/opinions added.
Helryx was never described as being “thin”, yet this was in the guidelines for her contest while information like her build “probably looking similar to a Toa Mata” was left out.

4. Ensure people have read all the canon quotes/info before they gain access to entry/voting to check people know enough about the character, and hopefully prevent people from voting for MOCs simply because they’re technically impressive or look cool.
This and the previous suggestion should reduce the number of entries to sift through early on and the number of polls necessary to do so, as many Helryx entries didn’t quite match canon descriptions of the character.
While some characters don’t have enough info and lore requirements to warrant this, I feel Helryx in particular would’ve benefited from it.

5. Maybe release the list of removed votes to put peoples’ minds at ease? I have no doubt there were plenty of dupe accounts, but without knowing which names got struck off people can never be sure there weren’t a few real people who got caught in the process. (just the usernames, keeping the process of catching them secret to prevent them from circumventing it is fine)

6. I’m not sure how this could be enforced, but I think structural integrity and part availability are important and should be considered.

7. Requiring a TTV Boards account with trust level 1, while maybe effective at avoiding dupe accounts, is not ideal for those who aren’t already boards members and could also look a little weird optics-wise.
There’s probably a better way this could be handled. Check email address age during account creation maybe? Maybe it could also be tied into suggestion 4 somehow?

8. Maybe add a second image of each MOC to the polls showing another angle, at least in the later rounds when there are fewer entries and fewer images for one’s browser to load. Side-by-side to save space, if the boards’ format supports this.

And lastly, what happens to those face tubes on the winning entry when the mask gets changed?

[Mctoran]

@Underscore

And lastly, what happens to those face tubes on the winning entry when the mask gets changed?

If the winning mask has a place for the tubes, they will remain. If not, the ends will probably get connected elsewhere