Home Artists Posts Import Register

Content

So there's two problems (I think; feel free to tell me that there isn't a problem at all with how things are!) that may result from the way the pinup works, as the Patreon grows. One is that the waitlist is very long. Two is that the votes get really high.

Problem One:

The problem with the waitlist is that if someone suggested something, it would currently be over a year for them to even show up on the roster, let alone win. Several characters on there are already a year, or even two, trailing along in votes. This is an issue because the pinup is supposed to be something that appeals to most of the Patrons, and if one isn't winning, it just means that the Patreon isn't interested, and only a small, select few would genuinely feel rewarded or interested in them when won.

Of course, I don't mean that to say "only the most popular characters should win", I still like doing HQ pinups of lesser-known ones, but I do think I have to be more restrictive in what I accept for the waitlist. I think some would be fine to request for the sketch streams, but month-long pinups I need to sift through and really think about if they fit that position and effort required.

So how do we fix it? Well, one method is that I sort through the waitlist and remove ones I think don't "fit" for a huge pinup effort. To try and make up for removing them, I could do a smaller, mini-pinup? or small set of sketches? If either of those sound like good ideas to compensate, and just be more restrictive and thoughtful of which characters I let on the roster list.

Another option would be to remove the waitlist entirely, and each month when I announce the winner, simply ask for fill-ins on the slot, and take the most-voted for at that point.

Problem Two:

With so many Patrons now, the vote count gets really high really quickly, compounding Problem #1 in that the lesser-known or lesser-wanted take up space on the roster for ages. I have a few fixes in mind: Either be tougher with the strike system, such as increasing requirements, or have a time limit, like if the character's been low for a year, to remove them, and to compensate do a picture with effort/time relative to the amount of votes they had at time of removal.

Ultimately, I want it to be a bit more even, and a bit less predictable or stacked. otherwise I worry it diminishes participation, and devalues the votes. It probably wouldn't be that bad if I could do two pinups per month, but I'm usually spend that 'extra pinup time' doing side images or projects like Vikna's Xmas pic or the ARA daki, for examples. I know a few months in the past that I did two, and I'd like to more often, but I don't feel it's something I can promise to have time for.

So I'd like to hear some ideas from you all, maybe something I haven't thought of, before making a poll out of a few ideas to see what everyone thinks.

Comments

Habilon

i like the idea of striking them out but doing a simpler sketch according to how many votes they have, something like no votes gets nothing, 25 gets a quick sketch, 50 gets lines, 100 gets rough colours and 150 gets simple shading... something like that

Adleisio Cefnfor

One thing I have seen other Patreon Creators do is that keep the list small and rotate characters and instead of having a running tally, it is just on say like the top 20, and they vote for say 1-2 and everyone gets one vote. after that, all votes for the next month disappear and start from scratch. Another thing some Creators do is they gather suggestions for a few days and then make the roster, and then have a short voting period. again one vote per person. and the roster changes each month as you are constantly getting new suggestions. I kind of like that the board gets cleared each month, so that you don't have compiling votes, but you can fix a wasted vote by keeping the roster small, and doing an alternative vote system where people would rank who they want in order and if you gradually eliminate the bottom character and move the votes from that character to the persons second choice. This could be trickier though.

Holy Zen!

I actually don't see the way things are as a huge problem. Or much of a problem at all, actually.

Maplesburg Publishing

I agree. I don't see any great problem with the current system. Changing nothing is a very viable option in my honest opinion.

SCPilot

You are correct there's a problem. In terms of the character suggestions, maybe rotate them in and out each month that way it would give some of the lesser known characters a chance to win. For example, pretty much everyone knows who Felicia from Darkstalkers is, but not many people are going to know who the Mrrshan Empress is. So pretty much the Empress will lose out to Felicia. But if you rotate the characters in and out it might improve the Emrpress's chances of winning. Also you could do it so that every other month you just do your characters. Say for example, next month you have people vote from your characters for the pinup. And in March you just have the suggested characters get voted on, and then April your characters and in May suggested characters and so on and so on. This gives the suggested characters a chance to shine without being overshadowed by your own characters but people can still vote for your characters the following month.

NexusX

u could also limit the amount of vote to give to a character to 2 or even 1 so they have to diversify their votes.

SCPilot

That sounds like a good idea and I was actually going to suggest that.

Maplesburg Publishing

I like your current system because it doesn't result in the selection of the character of the week as happens with creators who make a fresh roster each week. I've seen multiple people I was supporting do the same character the same week because they used that system. I think the best option to move through characters faster is to make the strike rules more stringent, but my opinion is that the system doesn't necessarily need to change at all.

Cylianthe (Falkiveurr)

I think these are real concerns that bother you a lot, but as I see it you're still just one person. Don't put too much pressure on yourself, I'd rather you be okay than get through the wait list faster.

TouchFluffyTail

What about reducing the number of characters on the roster so that more people have to vote over fewer characters. Say just 2 lines of fandom characters, and 1 line of FK characters. That way votes aren't spread around so many characters leaving them on the roster for so long. Mixed with stringent rules, perhaps something like Formula 1's 107% rule. The rule states you must get a qualifying lap within 107% of the fastest lap to qualify for the race, that way unreasonably slow cars can't qualify. Perhaps the lowest voted character must get at least 25% of the most voted for characters votes for the month or they fall off the roster? Something like that might work.

Simon Tesla

My main problem with the voting thing is that it's really complicated and feels like it doesn't work well with the month-to-month nature of patreon pledges, meaning someone can still have influence on the selection process even if they're no longer a patron. My suggestion would be, instead of doing a roster that slowly accrues votes, to just say that each month, you'll open for a round of nominations by $5+ patrons for characters (with a list of ineligible characters, e.g. the ones on cooldown, or that you just won't draw at all), and then later that month or the following month, you'll have that list up for votes, and patrons will be allowed to vote for the ones they want from that list as they do now, and the most votes wins. Having a cooldown period for a given character should help keep variety up without needlessly complicating things. If you're not looking at an outright replacement to your current system, my suggestion for adding variety would be to strike out characters with less than N votes on the first month that happens, for one, with a higher number of votes required to avoid a strikeout. Something like, if it receives less than 5% of the votes, it strikes out, so it scales with participation. Point is, if the character doesn't appeal to a wide base of patrons, it should spend much less time on the roster. Also don't be afraid to be more assertive about culling the list of options you don't think would work very well for you. To make old votes count less than newer votes, maybe divide the previous month's total vote count by 2, so that old votes naturally "age" out of the roster eventually. Finally, I'd suggest having a smaller roster at any given point in time. It's much harder to get something like a consensus with 28 options to choose from. I'd put that number closer to 10, so that people can put more wood behind fewer arrows when voting. Or maybe have two rounds of voting with the first one more of a "nomination" process to choose (for example) the top 5 options, and then have a round of voting for those options. All that said, I'm speaking as someone who doesn't really participate in voting (mostly because, like I said, the process seems pretty complicated and I don't have a huge stake in the outcome anyway), so take that with a grain of salt.

Volpethrope

I'm going to frame my suggestion under the assumption of *transitioning* your current system into a new one, because there's quite a lot of pledge money invested behind the current vote totals. A lot of people have joined this Patreon primarily to vote on your pinups, so totally wiping the system and starting over would essentially be negating all of those subscriptions. So first off, the vote totals explode way too quickly for popular characters, while lesser-known ones will flounder in the double digits for over a year before finally getting even a little traction. My suggestion for resolving this effect is to change from granting a number of *votes* to the tiers, to granting them a number of *charcters they can vote for.* Just scale it up alongside the tier, so the $1 tier votes for a single character, the $5 tier votes for two, et cetera. $25 could be either four or five votes, depending on what you feel is appropriate for the jump in investment. This forces the votes to spread out more and limits how much a popular character snowballs. A small issue with this is that there will be an awkward period where the current vote totals, which resulted from the higher vote numbers from the previous system, are now being added onto by a slower system. This would mean that the characters that have a huge lead currently will maintain that lead, essentially "locking in" the pinup progression for the next several months. However, this can be mitigated without wiping the existing totals by simply reducing them by a percentage, proportional to the different in voting strength then versus now. I'll do some dirty guestimation math here. Let's say most Patrons have 3-5 votes now, which are often only put toward 1-2 characters. So currently, any given character is likely to recieve 2-3 votes per person voting on them, sometimes more when higher tier patrons concentrate their investment, sometimes less from the many lower tier patrons who can't afford to spread their votes out. With this system, they can *only* recieve a single vote per Patron. Thus, I think the ideal measure would be to cut all of the current totals in half as part of the transition. This keeps the totals relative to each other, so the *weight* of the old votes isn't negated, but reduces the gaps between them to be closer to the new system. The second issue: the waitlist. For the future, I suggest not even having a waitlist. During the pinup voting, have people suggest characters as they often do now. After the vote is done, compile a list of the characters you think would be good for the primary pinup and let the Patreon vote on the list via instant-runoff voting like what you're using in the request streams now. This lets you prune the list only according to what you wouldn't want to draw or otherwise think there would be an issue with and not worry about guessing how much interest there may be, since the vote will serve to show you directly. Limit the list to a reasonable number, like 15 characters or so. And most importantly, do not do this in months where a fandom slot isn't opening. If it's a slot for your OCs or "Artist's Choice" categories, it's obviously up to you if you just want to put a character up or ask for feedback, possibly through a smaller instant-runoff vote (like if you couldn't decide between adding ARA, Warning, or Zofie back onto the list, for instance – just do a quick vote to guage interest). However, there is an existing waitlist, and like I said, the transition is as important as the new system. Many people have been waiting for some of these characters for a year or longer, so just tossing them aside would feel kind of shitty. My suggestion for dealing with this is to simply add them all into the voting list I just described. Mark them with "Legacy Waitlist" or something similar so it's clear where they're from, and to avoid confusion if they are later re-suggested. After the vote cycle is complete, take any Legacy Waitlist characters eliminated in the first five rounds and do a simple pinup of them, either at request sketch level or side pinup level (like the Ayn Halloween or Mihari cheerleader ones), depending on what you feel is appropriate. During the transition period, even in months where you don't need a newly-suggested character, run this vote with just the legacy characters in it to trim it, perhaps permanently eliminating fewer of them than when a slot actually needs to be filled. Or don't, it's up to you – just understand they'll be hanging around and taking up space in the suggestion list for longer. But that may not necessarily be a problem. I do also suggest being stricter with striking characters out. With the wider spread on voting in this system, it should be more obvious which ones genuinely don't have a lot of interest. I would advise completely wiping a character's vote total once they get struck out, since the instant-runoff vote to get added back on would necessitate that there be a decent number of people interested in voting for them. Obviously, most of the numbers I suggested are just that – suggestions. You might feel more comfortable tweaking them, like only eliminating the absolute lowest Legacy Waitlist character each month, or doubling my suggested number of characters each tier should get to vote on. The important thing is the actual structure of the system. If you feel I didn't explain something clearly, or it comes across a little rambly, by all means, let me know. :P

Anonymous

My suggestion is to trim the list down to 15 total characters. 5 your's and 10 other's. Each month the number of votes resets and any characters that gets less than 50 votes (about 5.5% of total patrons[910]) in a given month is removed from the list.

fluffkevlar

I briefly thought of that as an idea, but I don't think it's necessary. Looking at past years, it's been pretty close to 50-50 of my OCs VS fandom characters.

Commodore Cougar

I like the idea of giving the lesser known characters a chance at a smaller/less detailed pinup when they strike out, I think that would be an easy way of thinning out the list and still respecting those votes.

Wat

I've already told you this, but I think you should transition to a system that doesn't require any overhead management of ongoing poll results or take time away from you to finish the thing I pledge for. That thing being art from FluffKevlar, as neat as it if to see suggestions and ideas from yourself get drawn I think you'd be better off switching to a system that just uses in site polls and lets you experiment with the rewards you provide each month. Micromanaging names and vote numbers and list rules and such isn't why I imagine anyone on this patreon pledged to you, we just wanted to see cool art.

Tela

I'm gonna preface this by saying I love your work in general, but the big reason I stay subbed as a patreon is because of the smaller pieces you do and I want to support you in making them. The sketches that may never get completed, the request streams, the doodles, the quick pinups and one-off images, bitober, etc. I am certainly a quality over quantity sort of person, however I enjoy seeing a scattering of small little images and sketches. I get really happy whenever i see a post by any artist, especially you, even if it is just a sketch. This could also help keep people engaged during a month when a character wins the pinup who they don't care for, by adding diversity to the content produced. From my perspective, I would like to see maybe some less intense, side pinups. Such as fewer, if any, variations, perhaps no background, etc. (I do know you don't have an infinite amount of time each month to work with. This is just what I would favor in ideal circumstances) I also feel the strike system, the last time I looked it over at least, was too lenient.

Anonymous

Time limit sounds fair to me, those char with very low votes will never win because more popular characters will overtake them.

fluffkevlar

It's good to hear that side of things too, I like doing smaller works, pinups and sketches a lot as well. Thanks! I'll keep them in mind!

fluffkevlar

Good ideas, though a bit confusing, haha. I'll have to re-read this later and try to decipher it all.

fluffkevlar

Yeah trimming down would be nice, less hassle on me, and simpler for people.

fluffkevlar

Thanks for the input! I do like the idea of harsher rules and degrading vote count over time to try and 'weight' things out.

Anonymous

what about a pure elimination type of thing? every month the votes get reset, but when a character is removed because they won a new character is -not- added to the pool. this would keep going until each of them have had a win, then a new selection of characters is made.

Anonymous

I would work on the strike system, so when some characters aren't demanded enough, to take them out but do at least a sketch as compensation for the lost votes. This sounds very fair to me.

Kraton Haddock

I like option two to be honest. Once someone wins they should be dropped off the line and if they want back in they should go to the back of the line. like everyone else. The space left behind should be mini-voted upon for a new character in the line to take it's place, or better yet just remove that slot from the main roster and use a second mini roster like you said to vote for new people to be added over time (so more like an actual lineup where we only see the top 10 or 20 people at the front of the line and the rest sort themselves out behind the scenes).

Synariel

I like the overall system and i don't think it necessarily needs to change. I love your art in general but especially those pinups with a lot of variations and i hope to see a couple of lesser known chars i fancy eventually get the full treatment. Overall i think any change needs to be gradual to stay true to the people who pledged in the past However i see why you would want some modifications. Addressing first the number of votes, frankly it's what happen when you give your patrons a lot of vote per person. The only solution would be to reduce that but this will end up devaluating the different tiers. I don't like the idea of cast votes getting cut overtime. I think that if people pledged even for a limited time their vote should still count, not even saying anything about the people who casted their votes on a char constantly from a long time in the hope of seeing them win in a far future. Those people waited very long and deserve their pic. I think if you strike down their char when they have met the requirements to stay, they deserve some picture according to the number of votes. So why not every month or when you have time remove a char with a high number of votes who did not see them increase by a lot and doing a pic of them according to the number of votes they got. This can allow you to gradually trim down the roster and reduce it down if you decide to not fill up the vacant spots. To assure a waiting list turnover, another suggestion would be to rotate between your OCs and fan characters every month and only allow voting on one category. This may help getting a few stragglers out of the way. Another thing to do to get more turnover for the waitlist would be to remove the one or two least voted on character each month. The other way you can go about this is to harden the strike system, you can: Lessen the number of strikes before a char is struck down or up the votes requirement to not get a strike. You can also each month get a vote o the waiting list char to get on the roster and fill out the vacant space. But that is voting to allow a char to get voted on so this might be going a bit far.

Vicki M.

I definitely know what you mean. Checking each and every vote against a tier and tallying them up must be a NIGHTMARE, surely there's some voting site or something that could be used for it? One simple option as the waitlist goes is to run the polls for only one category each month, so the turnover is a little smoother. Maybe even have an "underdogs" poll occasionally for pinups of less-voted-for characters? They don't HAVE to be grouped together, especially with how populated the list is these days.

MiddKnight

I think I have a few solutions that can help roll the characters through faster. 1. When a character breaks 100 votes, do a sketch. When a character breaks 200 votes, do inks. When a character breaks 300 votes, do flats. And when a character wins the month poll, do shades/final touch ups. 2. If two more more characters are within 5% of each other's vote tally when one wins, consider doing a poll to have the characters in one pin-up. With the characters in their own separate layer groups in the PSD if someone only wants one or the other character. 3. Have two or three simultaneous rolling polls: 1 for popular/modern characters. And one for lesser known/older characters. The winners of the well known category gets done each month for two months, while the winner of the lesser known category gets done every third month.

Anonymous

I'm guilty I always voted Dizzy because I wanted to see her :(

Spartan277

Maybe you should have votes separated between your OCs and the other characters? I mean.. Ara and Ayn are gonna dominate every time for instance. Maybe seperating the voting pools would help allow the other non OCs, compete with the OCs that .. frankly draw most of us to you in the first place.

Simone Spinozzi

Uhm... you could... maybe do something like "first one gets a full pin-up, oldest 5 get a consolation prize of a sketch and then get removed and also the roster loses that many characters to vote on" thus you thin out the roster list and once you feel comfortable that the list has become small enough to be "manageable" (i suggest no more than 12 characters) with people managing to vote and get characters out monthly you stop shrinking the queue, but you still remove the oldest X character from the roster by giving them a sketch or a mini-pin-up.

Diverclores

A poll alone for the more popular characters and a different one for the least popular? I think it may encourage people to chose something else other than their favorite character.. thought that is just an idea which needs implementation.

TryManX

i personaly believe that you you should just wipe the roster every month and keep only the lowest every time even keep their tally to encorage the lesser popular getting picked Or another idea is leave the roster as is and simply bump up all un picked characters up 50 votes (of coarse this does run the problem of having ridiculous vote numbers over time) or maybe just add “artist votes” to the bottom 5 or so

dp

... I don't know if this fixes the problem. but you do the monthly stream, right? so why not keep the first to like, fifth or sixth winner of the pinup vote poll for the pinups and include the seventh down to the fifteenth place in the monthly stream? that would clean the roster pretty damn fast. just an idea ~dp