I appreciate your response, Thanks !
Can you vote according to your response to the poll?
1 Like
Just voted now.
I hope this poll get lots of attention from the community for increase engagement. And I wish @admin.hackathon will listen to the communityâs suggestions and look into it
1 Like
Done. Thanks for creating the poll, the result will be more objective.
1 Like
Shuffling projects positions in the voting poll would push people to at least have a look at the list. Iâm pretty sure lot of people come to only vote for one project cause the team said vote for âW6â or whatever. If itâs shuffled and doesnât have a number, voters will have to pay more attention and might find an other gem who knows
3 Likes
Yeah, removing the numbers: D6, D5, W10, etc., would help!
1 Like
Shuffling is great 
, as i always say, people come around and vote for the first three projects and leave.
2 Likes
I think I agree with you at some point, that people vote only for a project because the team said vote for âW6â but at some point, I think shuffling the position is not the best IMO rather let projects be arranged alphabetically as that will equally make the community to take a lot at other projects while searching for the one they want to vote for
1 Like
Yes, removing those number tags and listing the participating projects in alphabetical orders can equally help in making people be aware of other participating projects order than the shuffling of positions as that will make the platform look unorganised. IMO though
1 Like
I donât quite agree with that because people always vote according to number tags. You see each projects making announcement to their community members: vote for us in âD16â and others. No one ever vote for the first three projects unless that person donât have any investment in any Tron projects
1 Like
I dont know if u have studied those that come in last minute and ask about how to get to TL1, they are the once i am referring to. Family and friends to some of these projects and some of them have nothing to do with Tron.
Some dont even know what crypto is, u can read some of the topics around and you will understand. But anyway dont bother u will understand better in s4. Lol 
2 Likes
There were a few examples of voters who participated in S3, but I believe they were inactive throughout the season. However, they logged in on the day of voting, voted for a project, and then logged out until the next voting round.
I also noticed that several accounts had similar joining dates (8-11 Nov) and last seen dates (30 Nov):
I suspect this could be malicious voting, but this could only be confirmed by @admin.hackathon by checking the IP, device ID, etc. of those voters.
Of course, there are many accounts like this, and I only checked a few of them. My speculation may be wrong here.
In order to ensure the integrity of community votes, should we consider implementing a voter eligibility tag that would only allow eligible voters to participate in the voting process? This would help prevent situations where individuals may try to pay others to vote for their project in order to manipulate the outcome. What are your thoughts on this ?
3 Likes
Hola, siempre se ha dicho que los proyectos deben ser elegidos por el valor de estos en el mundo que nos movemos, y que las votaciones deben estar a la altura. -estoy completamente de acuerdo.
I think we are at the same line of thought that community members vote on projectâs position tags, and not just for the first 3 projects at each categories as mentioned by @Nana66419 but that aside, talking about voting eligibility tag, i think it serve the same purpose as community members getting to âTrust Level 1â before being eligible to vote. Or do you have any other specific criteria that need to be put into consideration? Maybe that will help to channel the discussion in the right direction.
1 Like
If a user has received Trust Level 1 but becomes inactive after receiving it, their Trust Level 1 should be downgraded to Trust Level 0.
An alternative to this system might be to introduce a tag such as âS4 voterâ that is reevaluated every season to ensure that users who have been granted voting rights are still active and contributing to the community. This would prevent users who may have gained voting rights in an earlier season from selling their votes to others in subsequent seasons.
There should be verifications in place to ensure that a user is not a fake account before granting them the âS# Voterâ tag. Additionally, the admins / community can use tools and techniques to detect and prevent fake accounts, such as checking for suspicious activity or examining the userâs profile and content to see if it seems legitimate.
2 Likes
Lo que propone me parece un poco complicado, si es cierto que cada persona que empieza nueva con derecho a voto, deberĂa conocer todos los proyectos y votar por los que han desarrollado mĂĄs novedades y presentan trabajo de calidad y con un uso.
La realidad es que si aplicamos todo esto Âżquien queda en el foro?
En cuanto las técnicas y las herramientas que tiene la organización me consta que las usan, ya que yo inicié una nueva cuenta para poder hacer un video detallado de como alcanzar el nivel1 y todo que me he puesto en contacto con todos los departamentos de Tron, estå bloqueada.
Al fin y al cabo, la cuenta creada no es para bien personal, sino como ayuda a los usuarios y no pensaba utilizarla luego, tal como expliqué e indiqué que era una subcuenta mia llamada prueba.
1 Like
Yes, I concur. Iâve always suspected that this would be more stringent, causing further damage to the already damaged platform. To be honest, I think there is nothing that can be done to ensure a good voting environment.
Va a ser un poco complicado
Canât have a perfect environnement as long as humans are part of the equation 
but we can try to make it harder for cheaters to win. And keeping in mind that the biggest prize comes from the judges.
So beside all the measures we talked up there, some other measures can be post-hackathon (payment with milestones, interview/AMA where the winners have to explain in detail what theyâve done and still have to do),âŠ
2 Likes
I completely agree!
Payment by milestone should be a viable option. Would you mind sharing more details so that more users can understand how it will work, so that I can include it in the post with the poll?
Normally, in a hackathon, projects are judged on what they have accomplished during the hackathonâs period.
Nevertheless, in the reality, it appears that some projects that won a prize havenât delivered that much and it occurred to me that some have won not only because of what has been delivered, but also for what they have promised. And actually the hackathon prize isnât only a reward imo but also a way to make sure good projects have enough funds to keep building and delivering.
Hence I think every project should not only build something and then itâs done but have to prepare a roadmap for the âafter hackathonâ.
Since the prize is meant to help them to achieve their future plans, the funds could be released as the teams reach some milestones. TronDaoâs team could then keep in touch with winners, see if they are really building and decide if the milestones are reached or not.
Itâs up the each team to decide what the milestones will be. And it would be up to the community and the judges to decide if those milestones (and what has been accomplished during the hackathon) are good enough to deserve a prize. Projects that decide to give up after receiving the first payment at the end of the hackathon wouldnât get the rest.
It would be a mix between hackathon season one and hackathon season 2/3.
Ideally we shouldnât have to implement that system. But weâve seen some projects promising the moon and finally giving up after receiving the prize in season 2. Iâm not even sure all the winners of season 3 are already on mainnet.
3 Likes