+- Devialet Chat (https://devialetchat.com)
+-- Forum: Devialet Chat (https://devialetchat.com/Forum-Devialet-Chat)
+--- Forum: Speakers (https://devialetchat.com/Forum-Speakers)
+--- Thread: Vote for SAM request (/Thread-Vote-for-SAM-request)
RE: Vote for SAM request - moreno1973 - 14-Jun-2014
(14-Jun-2014, 00:15)pete86 Wrote: At the bottom of the voting page:
"Due to voting abuse, we have been cleaning up the database of votes."
Devialet SAM voting system was just stupid. But rules are rules! Canceling votes means that company is losing its confidence. Respecting rules is how You can get confidence.
Doing cleaning of votes, Devialet is now creating a list od speakers THEY want to be SAM SOON...
People voted and what? You abused - We clean - and we will decide what is an abuse nad what is not.
All SAM VOTES system was purely created to make a marketing noise about Devialet.
RE: Vote for SAM request - beerman - 14-Jun-2014
Hi,
the idea of voting for SAM is laudable.
If people find methods to abuse it, the people are to blame.
I understand Devialet to clear the voting of abusing votes, if they have a proof for it, what they certainly do have.
RE: Vote for SAM request - Ekmanc - 14-Jun-2014
(14-Jun-2014, 09:54)beerman Wrote: Hi,
the idea of voting for SAM is laudable.
If people find methods to abuse it, the people are to blame.
I understand Devialet to clear the voting of abusing votes, if they have a proof for it, what they certainly do have.
It's not laudable at all in fact it is incredibly stupid. There is no speaker model in the world that has 100 combinations with Devialet, it's impossible to get 100 votes.
RE: Vote for SAM request - Rufus McDufus - 14-Jun-2014
Each person (well, email address) does get 5 votes though, so only 20 people needed to hit 100. Still pretty high for virtually all speakers...
RE: Vote for SAM request - f1eng - 15-Jun-2014
I think it is naive rather than stupid.
Humans are very much less honest than Devialet assumed, thats all.
RE: Vote for SAM request - GuillaumeB - 15-Jun-2014
(15-Jun-2014, 10:10)f1eng Wrote: I think it is naive rather than stupid.
Humans are very much less honest than Devialet assumed, thats all.
I think you're right, Frank.
Guillaume
RE: Vote for SAM request - Rob35 - 16-Jun-2014
Maybe it was naive, but what they're doing now is absurd. Egglestonworks Fontaine 2 is not lowered in votes and up next for SAM'ing while the many of the other speakers get their votes reduced by enormous amounts and SAM will probably never be realised for them. It's changing the rules of the game when playing and manipulating the outcome. I have no good word for it, of course it's their decision to decide which speakers to SAM but don't let people believe they have a say in this when, in the end, they have not.
RE: Vote for SAM request - Sobert - 16-Jun-2014
Wasn't the voting just to make the order of what speakers to be "SAMed" first? Just give them time
I got PMC and they are low in the charts, but sooner or later they will get to them as well
RE: Vote for SAM request - IanG-UK - 16-Jun-2014
Devialet could probably guess what speakers should be SAMed - models from Wilson, Magico, Sonus Faber, PMC, Giya, B&W, KEF, maybe Quad ESLs.
They could even validate it by asking their owners - where they have an email.
RE: Vote for SAM request - pete86 - 16-Jun-2014
I don't think we have to be so distrusting of Devialet now. Yes, they messed up by allowing the voting to be gamed so easily in the first place, but are trying to clean it up. It wouldn't be too hard to determine which votes came from the same IP address or the same/similar email addresses. I have no reason to believe they are deleting legitimate votes. And yes, if there are some speakers they have on hand already that they are implementing SAM for first, so what? How is that any different from choosing the speakers they had SAM'ed at launch?