That does make things simplerOr just revert to the simple auction.
That does make things simplerOr just revert to the simple auction.
... I wasn't aware there was a problem with that that needed to be solved. I had never intended to just reduce by 10% until it came down. I was going to make bigger cuts to larger mark ups. But even if I didn't, the pictures would still come down to where they should be. It might take a couple weeks longer than if they were at 1 million but that's really no big deal.and I've solved the problem of people setting their pics to 4 billion.
If you apply the persons full markup allowance as early as possible, there isn't any excess to cut after that. Not sure what you are saying.When you make your first price reduction pass, apply the person's full markup allowance as early as possible. Then, any excess markup over 500,000 just cut to 500,000 in one whack. After that, reduce 10% per day as planned.
You're assuming that is the algorithm I would use.Well, I'm starting to see pics just coming out of auction marked up to high 10 figures. At 10% per day, it takes 4 weeks to reduce 100 million to 6.25 million. 4 more weeks takes it down to 350,000ish. 4 more weeks to get into the area of 20,000. 4 more weeks to get to 1250, where a person gets enough quest points to buy one pic per day. So, from 100 million it takes 4 months to any semblance of affordability. If people price at 4 billion, add 6 more weeks to that.
Meh, thats like 3 lines of code. It's not a big deal at all.Nod. I think it is best to avoid a temporary datadase mod, where you add a field, changing coding structures, then you remove it again when it is of no more use.
That puts things in a complete deadlock for a week. I don't want to do that.The other idea I originally presented was to freeze buying for a week
The average query that you ask me for to find out stats is way more work than this database mod would be.Either can be done without any database or data structure mods.
I have no idea. I haven't given it any thought really. I do know just a cash on hand rating doesn't do it, and a cash paid rating doesn't do it. It has to be something outside of that. This is a complex question. I need to give it some thought when I have time.So, what do you think of my image valuation formula? It makes it hard for two people to collude in price fixing, where they sell and buy back their pics for like 100,000 each, setting an artificially inflated base price. One person can do the same thing alone with multiple accounts.
Yes, early on I realized it would be important to have a full log of all sales.Do you have records of every photo's sales? Since you quoted some mammoth sale prices to me I think you do.
Yes that is a factor that I could consider.You would need to add a field to the photo record for convenience, to avoid a lot of on demand searches. The field would be an integer, the number of different lifetime buyers. It starts at zero, of course, all unbought images have it set to zero. As a one time thing, count the number of unique buyers for each image, and populate the field on all owned pictures.
Why would you care if I did that?Nod. I think it is best to avoid a temporary datadase mod, where you add a field, changing coding structures, then you remove it again when it is of no more use.
Just points for the sake of ranking players.Why would we get points for viewing a picture? What would they be used for, if they aren't currency?
Pictures can get in the queue for a number of different reasons. I think I already listed off a bunch of them in a different thread.How do pics get vote matchups? Specifically?
I wouldn't say pictures with high page views were "sought out". It is usually either because we do an article on them or someone posts the link somewhere that has high traffic. Or they are doing well in our ratings so they have more visibility.The stsyem's assignment of matchups doesn't consider at all which girls are actually being sought out.
I didn't understand most of thatWell, they shouldn't be the only factor. In my pool sstem the main factor is bought sting confidence in ratings, finding ng startng pools for unrated, and providing new machups in a balanced way to give pics a chance a mobility.
Yes and I aim for more votes. I just don't think it is necessary to put them all on the same matchup.You do recall from statistics that the more votes you have (the larger the sample size) the smaller % chance there is an error in the result?
I have no idea... do we need to ask this in multiple threads?What is the average win percentage of battles of the day?
We get new pics daily... whether they are quality or not, is up for debate.I just tried to read through 4 pages of speculation on hypotheses here. I need a beer.
As a guy who has submitted A LOT of images, here are my feelings:
- I appreciate my privacy and cyber security.
- I'm not into taxation.
- I'm not into democratic socialism.
- I'm really not into playing some sort of game to get back something that was mine in the first place-- it's certainly easier to just look at pics of hot girls on my computer than to share them.
- After considerable work, it doesn't seem unreasonable that a person should be able to set his own sale price for his time and effort-- whatever that may be.
My advice to anyone crying foul:
- Upload an image.
- Buy it.
- Do whatever you want with it after that.
This site is in desperate need of some fresh quality material.
Well there originally wasn't price setting because I did intend that part of the game to be trading back and forth and fighting for pics.The original point of "The Game" was to cash out your points.
Yeah that's only about 10,000 times what it was originally. That system just wasn't going to work. People started buying bot traffic instead of just posting it on reddit and stuff. It did nothing to increase real traffic which was kind of the point of the cash out.Really, the most sensible and fair way to resolve things would be to reinstate points-for-money. 50¢/BabeTraderPoint seems fair, but I could settle somewhere around 40 cents per. That's just clean and streamlined.
Yes, I'm sure you did.And for the record, I photographed every image, of every girl, with realease form, that I submitted to this website.