Bot Contest
Here I'll be posting information on various Bot contests that challenge and test a Bot's AI and realism. Feel free to post comments and updates on contests, as well as announcements for new contests.
Posts 1,608 - 1,619 of 4,091
Posts 1,608 - 1,619 of 4,091
View Contest Winners in the Hall of Fame.
Nobodyhere, you were all up for eliminating the suspicious votes, and now that you hear that Talk-bot might benifit the most from it you start shouting accusations again? Let's stop being silly. Or at least, take it to the chatterbox forum where the rest of us don't have to listen.
to add to that i do also believe that rule changes need to be very very specific especially when you change them in the middle of a contest.
Regarding Nobodyhere I am using the very effect html tag. It works great: ignore - Nobodyhere - /ignore
Emm_oh_you_es_e I don't see your point. Nobody can make rules in advance to cover all contingencies. What the Professor is proposing will benefit everybody and penalize no one. Some may benefit more than others but all will benefit. If your bot got a score of 10 it will remain. The vast majority of the owners gave themselves a 10. There is nothing wrong with that. However, we want to remove that 1's that your bot received. Why because you received those 1's in an unfair manner that didn't have anything to do with how good your bot is. I don't see the problem and why any reasonable person would object to that.
One last point I put The Professor on the committee to look after the best interest of the PF. You all as a group is the sole reason the contest has grown like it has. The Professor has access to everything I do as well as the other committee members do. Trust me he is looking after your best interest.
Chris
Emm_oh_you_es_e I don't see your point. Nobody can make rules in advance to cover all contingencies. What the Professor is proposing will benefit everybody and penalize no one. Some may benefit more than others but all will benefit. If your bot got a score of 10 it will remain. The vast majority of the owners gave themselves a 10. There is nothing wrong with that. However, we want to remove that 1's that your bot received. Why because you received those 1's in an unfair manner that didn't have anything to do with how good your bot is. I don't see the problem and why any reasonable person would object to that.
One last point I put The Professor on the committee to look after the best interest of the PF. You all as a group is the sole reason the contest has grown like it has. The Professor has access to everything I do as well as the other committee members do. Trust me he is looking after your best interest.
Chris
Nobodyhere--
I like to play conspiracy theorist and look at a lot of what-ifs, but I don't go pointing fingers based on my conspiracy theories...
--Shady
I like to play conspiracy theorist and look at a lot of what-ifs, but I don't go pointing fingers based on my conspiracy theories...
--Shady
Wooo- the drama!
Nobodyhere- you crack me up. I investigated the votes because you asked for it, and am trying to remove these unconstructive votes, and you cry foul for that, too. Not that I'd do it, but what would please you?
A big point regarding "rules-changing". There wont be any. Removing war-votes is a part of upholding the rules we set up in the beginning. They are on the chatterboxchallenge.com web site:
"The public will be invited to vote on the bots using a scale from one to ten with the ten being the best possible score. The public will be asked to consider how well the logged conversation went: what was their overall feeling having read it? Was the bot responsive or simply evasive? Did the bot for the most part answer and respond back appropriately or was the conversation full of off the wall remarks? The better bots should give you the impression that you are really talking to a human being.
Better still the public will be encouraged to speak to each bot directly. They will be asked to talk to as many bots as possible so they can compare their qualities and shortcomings. They will be asked to be fair and unbiased when placing their vote. The contest depends on the goodwill of all those taking part."
We dont want this to descend into anything-goes voting. We want to maintain some reflection of the real ability of the bots involved.
Regarding 10s- I dont see any problem there. Of course a botmaster may favor their bot. I voted 10s (or near) for my top 5 favorite bots. It's the gouging that isnt good sportsmanship.
Nobodyhere- you crack me up. I investigated the votes because you asked for it, and am trying to remove these unconstructive votes, and you cry foul for that, too. Not that I'd do it, but what would please you?
A big point regarding "rules-changing". There wont be any. Removing war-votes is a part of upholding the rules we set up in the beginning. They are on the chatterboxchallenge.com web site:
"The public will be invited to vote on the bots using a scale from one to ten with the ten being the best possible score. The public will be asked to consider how well the logged conversation went: what was their overall feeling having read it? Was the bot responsive or simply evasive? Did the bot for the most part answer and respond back appropriately or was the conversation full of off the wall remarks? The better bots should give you the impression that you are really talking to a human being.
Better still the public will be encouraged to speak to each bot directly. They will be asked to talk to as many bots as possible so they can compare their qualities and shortcomings. They will be asked to be fair and unbiased when placing their vote. The contest depends on the goodwill of all those taking part."
We dont want this to descend into anything-goes voting. We want to maintain some reflection of the real ability of the bots involved.
Regarding 10s- I dont see any problem there. Of course a botmaster may favor their bot. I voted 10s (or near) for my top 5 favorite bots. It's the gouging that isnt good sportsmanship.
Well, I gave 1's, 3's 4's, 7's, 5,s and 10's all for a good reason, and I therefore think it would be ridiculous to just remove all ones... I'm sure this full blown war voting is extremely rare
Lunar, you are not understanding what is being done. I gave 1's, 3's 4's, 7's, 5,s and 10's as well. We are NOT removing those type scores. Here is exactly what we are doing. More than one person in this contest gave his bot a 10. They then proceeded to give other bots a score of 1. Johnny Cochran wouldn't defend such foolishness. 1's are indeed a valid score but not when a person gives every bot a 1 while giving his own bot a 10.
Chris Cowart
Chris Cowart
It's still very subjective. If you define war voting as giving your bot a 10 and every other bot a 1, someone could circumvent this definition by giving tens to low ranking bots and ones to high ranking bots.
and one score deviating from that system would mean it's not war voting... in other words, lay off... everybody ran that chance
Am more annoyed by ppl voting that obviously never spoke to your bot...
Am more annoyed by ppl voting that obviously never spoke to your bot...
These contests are nothing but an irritation to me. I think I'll be avoiding all of them from here on out.
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar