Rules and Advice
Citadel Help
10 Votes


Hits: 1513
Comments: 15
Ideas: 2
Rating: 2.9
Condition: Normal
ID: 7397


March 29, 2014, 9:27 am

Vote Hall of Honour

You must be a member to use HoH votes.
Author Status


My Voting Practices


A guide for other users to better understand my voting criteria and what my votes mean.

After much procrastination and internal debate. Allow me to help you understand my

voting practices.

First, credit must be given where it is due, to Mourngrymn, for coming up with the idea

and to Silveressa for expanding upon it and her idea that everyone (or those who are

willing) should create one.

Current Voting Scores/Meaning.

1.0/5 - Needs some serious work – not ready for public consumption

1.5/5 –

2.0/5 - Okay idea but flawed. Has a few issues but can still be useable by some

2.5/5 –

3.0/5 - Good solid idea, nothing fancy, just a great, useable, quality submission

3.5/5 –

4.0/5 - Sweet idea with some artistic flair or increased usefulness that really set it apart

4.5/5 –

5.0/5 - Exceptional Submission. Extremely useable, well written, and organized.

My Interpretation.

1.0/5 – This submission needs to have some serious work done with it and should not

yet have been released. Bad spelling. Poor Grammar. This submission is unreadable.

Submissions with a score this low will be challenged.

1.5/5 – A very basic idea. Over-saturation/been done before. Still hasn’t been put through

a spellchecker (I’m guilty of this myself on occasion), but there is something here. Put it

back in work and improve on it. Depending on content/reason submissions with a 1.5/5

score may or may not be challenged.

2.0/5 – As with Silveressa, this is the beginning score for a submission that shows

potential. With a good idea, that might not have been properly thought out. A 2.0 will

also be given to submissions that may have good content but with serious flaws in

spelling and grammar.

2.5/5 – My lowest ‘good’ score. (Anything less than a 2.5 on my submissions will prompt

me to place it straight back ‘in work’). There is an idea here that I would like to see

expanded upon; spelling and grammar are passable.

3.0/5 – The ‘standard’ score that I will give most submissions. Good spelling and

grammar. The idea is a good one. Perhaps lacking a little in originality or depth/detail.

3.5/5 – There is something here that I like/can use. Pretty much the same as 3.0/5 but

with more detail/simpler adaptability.

4.0/5 – This is where it starts getting good. I can see that a lot of time and effort has gone

into the submission. Whilst it may not be to my liking or in my interests, it is of good


4.5/5 – Ticks all my main +0.5 boxes. Very well thought out. Detailed. Made with a lot

of TLC.

5.5/5 – Crème de la crème. The very best. There isn’t really much I can say for this score.

A comment on the submission will generally contain my reasons why.


I will of course re-vote on anything that has been updated if I have voted on it previously.

The author has made special effort to edit this and that should not, as is so often the case,

go unnoticed. My re-vote will be accompanied by a reason and praise/critique. Usually

good-natured of course.


Up-votes will be given to every user that comments on and has something useful

to say on one of my own submissions, thereby hopefully encouraging them to vote

and comment more on other peoples stuff. Up-votes will also be given on other’s

submissions, where a good idea, constructive criticism or some other valuable/witty

comment is given.


3.0 tends to be my ‘standard’ score. So here is a list of those things for which an increase

will be given:

  • Spelling, grammar and punctuation.
  • Usefulness to the GM/DM.
  • Quick to prepare/understand.
  • I like this. A lot.

  • Challenging a submission.

    It is rare that I should challenge a submission, in fact, I cannot remember ever issuing a

    challenge. However, should I need to do this it will only be for a select few reasons:

  • The submission has received either a 1.0/5 or 1.5/5 rating.
  • The ‘author’ has stolen someone else’s work.
  • Hall of Honor.

    My HoH vote will be given to particularly good submissions, 5/5’s, and anything that I

    like enough.

    More often than not though, it is given to draw attention to a particular submission; either

    one that has not received the attention it deserves or one that is so good that the Citadel

    needs to be reminded it is there.

    Golden Vote.

    Recently acquired, and only given out twice so far. The Golden Vote is reserved for

    submissions that are truly amazing! That have no flaws, are incredibly detailed and

    entertaining, and where the author has given her/his all.


    After much mumbo-jumbo and rambling... There you have it; how I vote.

    If you have any questions, please, do not hesitate to ask! I will answer as best I can.

    Additional Ideas (2)

    Herein, I shall finally reveal the unfathomable secrets behind my personal voting system...

    I pick a number between 1 and 5, 1 being utter crap, 5 being excellent.

    2013-06-10 12:34 PM » Link: [7397#87891|text]
    so what does a 2.5 mean?

    2013-06-10 05:27 PM » Link: [7397#87901|text]
    honestly? 2.5 means I probably didn't like the sub :-)

    2013-06-11 11:49 AM » Link: [7397#87921|text]
    In answer to axelrowes reply to my reply, which I also see as an Idea so I'll put it here. I hope that it might shed some light.

    I would think the sites nature to be very clear. As for my perceived place within the community, I'm afraid I don't quite understand, but will try to offer what information I can.

    The way I see it, we are all equal here and this is a place where we can exchange material, discuss roleplaying, and generally interact with other people as happens on forums and sites. I don't give myself nor another a 'place' or 'rank' in the Citadel, with the exception of Strolen and the admins. The ranking system is just a way to see who contributes and how much they give.

    I would think that my submission answers the reasons as to why I vote, and my criteria for such. However, I do not think that I can give a full explanation on why I vote, as the reasons for voting are numerous, as I'm sure we would all agree and each have our own reasons.

    2013-06-11 05:26 AM » Link: [7397#87909|text]
    It does not say why you vote. Even you conclusion say this is how you vote.

    Does the voting system contribute positively to the Citadel? Does system of stick and carrots improve the content? What value do you put on the votes that you get?

    Could voting system contribute to biased system that excludes certain types of content? Is that a good a thing?

    Thanks for playing.


    2014-03-29 09:48 AM » Link: [7397#90904|text]
    Please register to add an idea. It only takes a moment.

    Suggested Submissions

    Join Now!!

    Gain the ability to:
    Vote and add your ideas to submissions.
    Upvote and give XP to useful comments.
    Work on submissions in private or flag them for assistance.
    Earn XP and gain levels that give you more site abilities.
    Join a Guild in the forums or complete a Quest and level-up your experience.
    Comments ( 15 )
    Commenters gain extra XP from Author votes.

    June 8, 2013, 10:21
    This is good, not only for people wondering why you voted the way you did, but also as a checklist for everyone else before we click that "submit" button. Well done!

    (On a side note, It's really hard to assign a numerical score to posts like these. They aren't necessarily interesting or useful to my DnD game, but they are good references, and benefit everyone.)
    June 10, 2013, 7:19
    Not so much a checklist for everyone else. Rather my own personal criteria, although I will admit that there is some vagueness to it. I will try to expand further.
    Voted Forganthus
    June 8, 2013, 10:21
    Only voted
    Voted Scrasamax
    June 8, 2013, 22:48
    Another voting guideline submission.
    June 10, 2013, 7:17
    Indeed it is.

    I've always been interested in how people 'use' the voting system.
    Voted Cheka Man
    June 8, 2013, 23:40
    Nice. 3.5/5
    Voted Moonlake
    June 9, 2013, 0:21
    I like the fact that you clearly spell out your own interpretation on each of the possible scores. For me, this sub is 3.5.
    June 10, 2013, 7:15
    Thank you Forganthus. Although it would appear that not everyone shares your view.
    Voted axlerowes
    June 9, 2013, 9:38
    the how but not the why
    June 10, 2013, 7:16
    I don't understand, perhaps I mis-read. What do you mean by your comment?
    June 10, 2013, 15:21
    Why do you vote?  I am all for the voting and ranking systems, but without your perspective on the nature of site in general and your perceived place in the community we don't get a full picture. 
    June 11, 2013, 5:26
    Added an idea that should help.
    March 29, 2014, 9:27
    Update: Sub re-upload. Was lost to the void.

    Link Backs


    Random Idea Seed View All Idea Seeds

           By: Strolen

    Diseased people, (leprosy or any other such fear inducing disease) when traveling, will often times wear a cloak that entirely covers their body and ring a bell as they travel, used as a warning for any others to stay away. Could be used for a disguise or safe passage. ... you meet strangely cloaked people, sometimes ringing a bell. "Please give us something to eat, mighty heroes!" This is time to show how good they are.

    Encounter  ( Any ) | February 16, 2003 | View | UpVote 4xp

    Creative Commons License
    Individual submissions, unless otherwise noted by the author, are licensed under the
    Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
    and requires a link back to the original.

    We would love it if you left a comment when you use an idea!
    Powered by Lockmor 4.1 with Codeigniter | Copyright © 2013 Strolen's Citadel
    A Role Player's Creative Workshop.
    Read. Post. Play.
    Optimized for anything except IE.