ticalc.org
Basics Archives Community Services Programming
Hardware Help About Search Your Account
   Home :: Archives :: News :: October 1999 POTM Vote

October 1999 POTM Vote
Posted by Andy on 17 November 1999, 22:43 GMT

I'm pleased to finally release the voting page for the October POTM Vote. Unfortunately, we had some technical problems associated with the vote. We have removed the past winners from the class they have won in. Remember, next month the nominations will be determined from the featured programs, and we will go directly to a vote.

 


The comments below are written by ticalc.org visitors. Their views are not necessarily those of ticalc.org, and ticalc.org takes no responsibility for their content.


Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
ajorians  Account Info

I am glad that Block Dude in the ti-86 catagory is there. I am voting for it. Although I was busy and not had the time to beat it. If anyone knows the passwords, please e-mail them to me.
Also, FIRST COMMENT.

     17 November 1999, 23:03 GMT

Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
stealth  Account Info

Some nice programs were on there. Everyone vote for Solar Striker for the 89/92+, its a kick a$$ game!

     17 November 1999, 23:30 GMT

Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

"past winnders"? :)

     17 November 1999, 23:45 GMT


Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
ticalc_chris Account Info
(Web Page)

"sarcasism"?

     18 November 1999, 02:51 GMT


Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

It seems like the typo that was originally there has been fixed.

--
Bryan Rabeler
"All opinions are equal, yet some opinions are more equal than others."

     18 November 1999, 04:04 GMT

Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

Ok, now why are Ion and Phoenix on the list? They have both won before in their respective categories!

     17 November 1999, 23:46 GMT

Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Patrick Davidson  Account Info
(Web Page)

Would any ticalc.org staff be willing to enlighten us as to why the 89 and 92+ are the same calculator? They look different to me.

     18 November 1999, 00:07 GMT

Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

Yeah, me too. I own both calculators, and the same programs don't run on both. However, TI-83 and TI-83 Plus Ion programs do run on both, however ticalc.org has seperated these two calculators. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

     18 November 1999, 00:42 GMT

Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Scott Noveck  Account Info
(Web Page)

I stopped complaining about that months ago when it became apparent that whoever is in charge of that hasn't had much experience with both calcs -- even with the same games, they play so differently. . . =(

     18 November 1999, 01:06 GMT


Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
AgntM13 Account Info

TI-83 and 83 plus assembly games will not run on both calcutaltors, unless there are two versions of it, one for each. Most basic games will though.

     19 November 1999, 02:34 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

This is also the case for the TI-89 and TI-92 Plus, most of the time at least.

     19 November 1999, 07:58 GMT


Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
ticalc_chris Account Info
(Web Page)

I think the argument has to do with the vast majority of programs on either the TI-89 or TI-92 Plus also being available for the other calculator. With the TI-83/TI-83 Plus, there's not quite the same level of consistency (especially when you get beyond Ion).

But if the playability varies drastically between the TI-89 and TI-92 Plus (and I won't comment on this, since I don't own either), that's a valid argument for separate voting/awards. If someone wants to outline differences like this in detail, it would be very helpful in convincing us. Thanks,

Chris

     18 November 1999, 02:51 GMT

Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

What are you talking about Chris? Its more likely than not, that programs are ported between the TI-82, TI-83, and TI-83 Plus than between the TI-89 and TI-92 Plus. If you haven't notice, a vast majority of the current TI-83 Plus programs are just ports. Same with the Ion programs for the TI-83.

But beyond that, lets get to the real reason why we have seperate categories for the TI-82 and TI-86. People don't own more than one or two calculators. It would be unfair to have everyone vote on all the programs, because then programs for such calculators as the TI-92 Plus would be put at a large disadvantage. So that's why there are different categories, seperated by calculator model, so only the people that actually own the calculator will vote for those programs. So why combine two calculators? Do you think everyone that owns a TI-89 also owns a TI-92 Plus? I don't think so. It would be different if every program were compatiable on both calculators, but that simply is not the case.

--
Bryan Rabeler
"The first sign of corruption in a society that is still alive is that the end justifies the means." - Georges Bernanos

     18 November 1999, 03:44 GMT

Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Patrick Davidson  Account Info
(Web Page)

I have written a short article which explores this issue in some more depth. Rather than use up 4 more pages of this message board, I instead placed it on my own web page. The address for this page is:

http://pad.calc.org/equity.html

     18 November 1999, 09:00 GMT


Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Blue_Z  Account Info
(Web Page)

IMHO, you should post a survey about this. This way we could easily see what most peoples want.

     18 November 1999, 14:46 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
SPUI  Account Info

Not that they'd listen to the results...

     18 November 1999, 15:33 GMT

Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Russkiy  Account Info

Damn, you ppl voting for one single game are ridiculous! Tezxas alone gives you few thousand games!
AS92 is cool too, but Im still using off-calc assembler.

     18 November 1999, 00:51 GMT


Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Scott Noveck  Account Info
(Web Page)

The problem is that the guidelines for what we pick aren't clear: Are we voting for the BEST program, or are we voting for our favorite?

Case in point: The 92 vote contains both Phoenix and Solarstriker. While Solarstriker is undoubtedly a more complex program, it just isn't as much fun as Phoenix (thank Patrick Davidson for that =) I voted for Phoenix in this instance, but at other times if there's a drastic difference between the programs -- say, something like tetris against something like prosit (a multitasking OS, but not the most useful at this point), I would choose Prosit out of all the respect I have for the skill needed to write that.

I also think a programmer's point of view is going to be VERY different from a gamer's, which causes some of the arguments here (judging from the results, gamers are the vast majority).

Judging from a few months back, when the Street Fighter 2 v1.0 beta THAT WILL NOT GO MORE THAN THREE MATCHES WITHOUT CRASHING had more than twice as many votes as the other fun, stable programs COMBINED, it seems that we as visitors are not capable of awarding deserving programs ourselves. As the site and awards are both managed by ticalc.org, I think they have every right to either choose the programs themselves or only take the votes of select individuals. Would you rather have a very good looking graphical browser that makes you reset your computer -- and lose all data -- every 5 minutes, or something not quite as good looking but completely stable? Seems like a good analogy to that SF2 vote to me. . .

     18 November 1999, 01:17 GMT

Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

<sarcasism>
ticalc.org is a service. A free service. Nothing you say or do will change ticalc.org's mind. You can't make them do anything. If you don't like it, leave.
</sarcasism>

--
Bryan Rabeler
"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." - Lord Acton

     18 November 1999, 01:47 GMT

Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
ticalc_chris Account Info
(Web Page)

You make a very good point -- should POTM award programs that are the most fun/pretty, the most stable, the most technologically advanced, ...? It's a tough call. Right now, though, we're asking people to define "Program of the Month" for themselves and vote according to their own definitions. But having consistent criteria is definitely something to consider, and I'll recommend that for a survey question in the near future...

Chris

     18 November 1999, 02:48 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

Your right he made a good point. The fact is, you guys haven't defined what POTM is or means, its just there. And if everyone votes according to their own definitions, what does that mean? The result doesn't mean anything... its just a bunch of people voting for all different things, its a big mess.

Great, another survey. You'll get a few hundred different responses on how to do it, all different. It'll be hard to decide. But I guess that's what the coordinators are there for, to make the "tough" decisions.

--
Bryan Rabeler
"The power to, as you say "romp on over you", comes from the fact that a majority of the staff says so." - Magnus Hagander, 22 November 1998

     18 November 1999, 03:48 GMT


Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Harper Maddox  Account Info
(Web Page)

You are implying that you should be the only person to choose the programs of the month. The whole concept of POTM is democracy in voting. Each person votes for whichever program they think is best. Some people, myself included, think that Street Fighter II is a better game than a stable Tetris program since tetris is not original. Let people think for themselves.

--Harper Maddox
"In free society, art is not a weapon" - John Fitzgerald Kennedy

     18 November 1999, 03:21 GMT

Re: Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

How do you define best? What does best mean?

--
Bryan Rabeler
"The last thing we want is a "cover-up." As this guy said, there's no reason to take out intelligent and purely speculative posts. Even if they're true." - Chris, 4 November 1998

     18 November 1999, 03:51 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Scott Noveck  Account Info
(Web Page)

Then accept a little challege: Play SF2 for more than ten minutes straight. I bet you can't even go five - how can you judge a game that goes for a few minutes and then destroys everything on the calc as deserving of an award?!?

     19 November 1999, 05:10 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Bryan Rabeler  Account Info
(Web Page)

Scott, I hope this isn't news to you, but the POTM is far from perfect. :)

--
Bryan Rabeler
"I personally guarantee that there will be no 'censorship' of what he [Bryan Rabeler] writes (as long as he keepts to the rules about such things as language used)." - Magnus Hagander, 5 March 1999

     19 November 1999, 08:00 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: October 1999 POTM Vote
Alfred Hoppe  Account Info

Say Bryan, I sent you an E-mail concerning my Doom game- did you read it?

I don't care what I'm called as long as your talking to me!!!!!
-DOOMRater

They say one has to be good in this business. Well I'm better.
-The Godfather

     22 November 1999, 19:12 GMT

1  2  

You can change the number of comments per page in Account Preferences.

  Copyright © 1996-2011, the ticalc.org project. All rights reserved. | Contact Us | Disclaimer