8/28/2013 Feature: "You Make the Card: Name Top 4"

36 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of the feature article "You Make the Card 4: Name Top 4", which goes live Wednesday morning on magicthegathering.com.

Quinn_Nightshade wrote:

 

Uh...something seems a bit off there.  The "results" show Carpe Noctem went up against Skullduggery and won 73.7% to 26.3%.  However, I voted for both of those names to make it through to the next round.  Considering that we were only allowed to vote for one name per pairing, and I voted for both of those names, it seems to me that someone at Wizards went and fudged the pairings a little bit before giving us our "results."  It looks like, rather than eliminating the lowest-voted name of each pairing, Wizards eliminated the 4 names with the lowest votes period.  That strikes me as a little bit deceptive, as we made our votes based on which of the two in the pairing we liked better, not which we liked best overall.  Also, I remember Carpe Noctem being up against Waste Not, which would mean that someone playing with the pairings let at least one name into the top 4 that shouldn't have been there and at least one name that people liked got kicked back out.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Amarsir wrote:


Quinn_Nightshade wrote:
Uh...something seems a bit off there.  The "results" show Carpe Noctem went up against Skullduggery and won 73.7% to 26.3%.  However, I voted for both of those names to make it through to the next round.  Considering that we were only allowed to vote for one name per pairing, and I voted for both of those names, it seems to me that someone at Wizards went and fudged the pairings a little bit before giving us our "results."  It looks like, rather than eliminating the lowest-voted name of each pairing, Wizards eliminated the 4 names with the lowest votes period.  That strikes me as a little bit deceptive, as we made our votes based on which of the two in the pairing we liked better, not which we liked best overall.  Also, I remember Carpe Noctem being up against Waste Not, which would mean that someone playing with the pairings let at least one name into the top 4 that shouldn't have been there and at least one name that people liked got kicked back out.

Thanks, I knew something felt wrong about those results.


I also just noticed that the 4 radio buttons on today's run-off apparently share the same name because only 1 can be checked at once.  I'm on my ipad so I can't easily check the source code, but this makes me skeptical that it's properly collecting two separate votes.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

FineVintage wrote:


Quinn_Nightshade wrote:
Uh...something seems a bit off there.  The "results" show Carpe Noctem went up against Skullduggery and won 73.7% to 26.3%.  However, I voted for both of those names to make it through to the next round.  Considering that we were only allowed to vote for one name per pairing, and I voted for both of those names, it seems to me that someone at Wizards went and fudged the pairings a little bit before giving us our "results."  It looks like, rather than eliminating the lowest-voted name of each pairing, Wizards eliminated the 4 names with the lowest votes period.  That strikes me as a little bit deceptive, as we made our votes based on which of the two in the pairing we liked better, not which we liked best overall.  Also, I remember Carpe Noctem being up against Waste Not, which would mean that someone playing with the pairings let at least one name into the top 4 that shouldn't have been there and at least one name that people liked got kicked back out.


Confirmed! The original votes were Skullduggery vs. Spoils of Misery, Carpe Noctem vs. Waste Not, Drudge Rummage vs. Riches from Rags, and Necroharvest vs. Vile Plunder.


But the results show us Carpe Noctem vs. Skullduggery, Waste Not vs. Spoils of Misery, Vile Plunder vs. Riches from Rags, and Necroharvest vs. Drudge Rummage.

WTH WotC?

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Pariah_Press wrote:


Card Makers,

I'll look into the situation with the voting software when I get into work tomorrow. It certainly looks (from my home computer here) like the vote got messed up. If, as it appears, the votes weren't recorded properly, I'll ask Trick if we can schedule a re-vote.


  -Ethan Fleischer, Magic R&D


(Posted from my old account, since I never did get an official WotC account.)  

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

mulen wrote:


were the votes correct for the other parts of the design?
 

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Fenix. wrote:


mulen wrote:
were the votes correct for the other parts of the design?

now everything starts making sense...

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Pariah_Press wrote:


I talked to Trick. We should have a new vote up tomorrow. Thanks for catching the problem, guys.


  -Ethan Fleischer, Magic R&D

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

FineVintage wrote:


The front page banner/image for the REVOTE is linking to the Top 8 vote at


www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.a...


rather than to the actual revote at


www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.a...


Edit: The wrongly-pointed link has now been fixed.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

BorosGreengrocer wrote:


Poor Carpe Noctem.


I hope Waste Not doesn't win. Not that there's anything wrong with the name, but I don't think something a Wizards person came up with should win at the expense of the community's suggestions.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Sir_Kraemer wrote:


Well, I voted for land and got enchantment. Voted for red and got black. Now I voted for Carpe Noctem and get...crap. Sucks to be the loser in the democratic process...

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Jman22 wrote:


More likely result: Carpe Noctem was winning, and WotC didn't want to call a card Carpe Noctem.


Too bad this card sucks, or I'd be more invested in it. For now, I'm just going to vote for the names most likely to not be made into other cards.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Matt_Holck wrote:


Latin extensions is just what these cards want to work


in the days of serif , letters were hammered in stone

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Tiara wrote:


Jman22 wrote:
Too bad this card sucks, or I'd be more invested in it. For now, I'm just going to vote for the names most likely to not be made into other cards.


This. I want to see them save Waste Not for a split card.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

anselan wrote:


Carpe Noctem is a great name, but maybe needed explanation. It also doesn't fit the card quite as well as Waste Not. It can hopefully be applied to a later card, maybe even one in Theros block which is Night & Enchantment themed. Skullduggery is a clever name too. Certainly I hope that any card never print any more cards which are Vile X, Spoils of Y, Necro Z. Once is enough for each of those.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

EternalUnreality wrote:


anselan wrote:
Carpe Noctem is a great name, but maybe needed explanation.

It's too bad they asked for people to provide explanations, then didn't post them for the names chosen.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

GoutyNaturalists wrote:


A card named Carpe Noctem should really parallel Seize the Day in some way.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

xger wrote:


Tiara wrote:
Jman22 wrote:
Too bad this card sucks, or I'd be more invested in it. For now, I'm just going to vote for the names most likely to not be made into other cards.
This. I want to see them save Waste Not for a split card.

Waste Not would not be eligible for a split card as it has the wrong format. Split cards are always names blank and blank.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Matt_Holck wrote:


they really should do a food fight set

Spaghetti and Meatballs

Macaroni and Cheese

Chocolate and Peanut Butter

Peanut Butter and Jelly

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

RPJesus wrote:


Wait, I think these are still wrong. I distinctly recall Skullduggery and Riches from Rags being my two top choices and being happy I didn't have to choose one right off the bat.

 

GreenBuster wrote:
I voted for Spoils of Misery for the first set.  Skullduggery doesn't really match what the card is doing.


Voted Waste Not for the second pair.  Had no idea what Carpe Noctem meant.  Yes, I did look it up but I still prefer a card name whose meaning is immediately apparent (I know that there have been cards with names whose meanings aren't immediately apparent.  That doesn't mean I have to support such a naming scheme.).  Plus I believe that Waste Not is a reasonable name.  Yes, the opponent is losing resources.  But you are essentially utilizing those resources so the resource isn't totally wasted.


I didn't like either option for the third set.  Neither seem like a name I would want on a Magic card.  I chose Drudge Rummage as it seems closer to the effect of the card.


For the forth set I voted Necroharvest.


"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

FineVintage wrote:


The brackets in this revote are STILL WRONG!


Again, the original votes were for Skullduggery vs. Spoils of Misery, Carpe Noctem vs. Waste Not, Drudge Rummage vs. Riches from Rags, and Necroharvest vs. Vile Plunder.


These results are for Riches From Rags vs. Skullduggery, Waste Not vs. Carpe Noctem,
Vile Plunder vs. Drudge Rummage, and Necroharvest vs. Spoils of Misery.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."


kahtfish wrote:

 

So, where's the link for the final vote? The article says it's supposed to be on the webpage today...  o.O

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

RPJesus wrote:

 

kahtfish wrote:
So, where's the link for the final vote? The article says it's supposed to be on the webpage today...  o.O

I would assume they pulled the thing down to set up some sort of mail-in ballot revote of the original 8, assuming they noticed our pointing out that the brackets were still incorrect.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

mulen wrote:

 

xger wrote:
Tiara wrote:
Jman22 wrote:
Too bad this card sucks, or I'd be more invested in it. For now, I'm just going to vote for the names most likely to not be made into other cards.

This. I want to see them save Waste Not for a split card.

Waste Not would not be eligible for a split card as it has the wrong format. Split cards are always names blank and blank.

It would be something like waste not / want not

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Amarsir wrote:

 

mulen wrote:
xger wrote:
Waste Not would not be eligible for a split card as it has the wrong format. Split cards are always names blank and blank.

It would be something like waste not / want not

Yes but his point is that the "//" between splits can be stated as "and" and it will always make sense:


Assault // Battery = "Assault and battery"
Alive // Well = "Alive and well"
Breaking // Entering = "Breaking and entering"
Catch // Release = "Catch and release"


Those are all phrases.  But "Waste Not and Want Not" is not a phrase, so it wouldn't be flagged as a split card.


However, I do like someone's idea from another thread of it being two different cards in the same set. I believe their idea was "Waste Not" being this card and "Want Not" being a white enchatment that rewarded you for replacing your draw with a mill.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

OmegaM wrote:

 

Good grief. I miss the first vote on Monday, so I make sure to show up on Wednesday for the second vote and then on Friday for the final one. Now I find out I needed to show up on Thursday, too? Guess I'll be coming here every day from now on.


I know this is a free contest, but it hasn't been run very well, what with them allowing us to vote to make a land and then biasing us against doing so; putting a non-American's card design in the top 8; and now running these votes so quickly. I'd rather they not have this contest at all than run it like this.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Justice_Theurge wrote:

 

There are certainly lessons to be learned.  My guess is that the biggest one is to lay the potential process out before things begin and ask for input on it.  My guess is that they didn't see the restrictions on where card ideas could come from being an issue, and just about everything else that has gone haywire probably could have been avoided with a couple of days of community comment.


It's too bad that things have been like this.  I feel like the people doing this were really excited about it at the beginning and wanted it to be successful and fun like the previous two.  You Make the Card is a good contest, it just needs a little tuning.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

mulen wrote:


Amarsir wrote:
mulen wrote:
xger wrote:
Waste Not would not be eligible for a split card as it has the wrong format. Split cards are always names blank and blank.

It would be something like waste not / want not

Yes but his point is that the "//" between splits can be stated as "and" and it will always make sense:


Assault // Battery = "Assault and battery"
Alive // Well = "Alive and well"
Breaking // Entering = "Breaking and entering"
Catch // Release = "Catch and release"


Those are all phrases.  But "Waste Not and Want Not" is not a phrase, so it wouldn't be flagged as a split card.


However, I do like someone's idea from another thread of it being two different cards in the same set. I believe their idea was "Waste Not" being this card and "Want Not" being a white enchatment that rewarded you for replacing your draw with a mill.

not all the split cards are made to have the // be and.

 

Boom // Bust

Order // Chaos

Illusion // Reality

Profit // Loss


I think waste not//want not would fit in well with those


"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Jack-Daemon wrote:


xger wrote:
Tiara wrote:
Jman22 wrote:
Too bad this card sucks, or I'd be more invested in it. For now, I'm just going to vote for the names most likely to not be made into other cards.

This. I want to see them save Waste Not for a split card.

Waste Not would not be eligible for a split card as it has the wrong format. Split cards are always names blank and blank.

Waste and Recycle would!


I have to say this never happened before witht he old YMTCs. Its almost like Wizards don't care. If WotC don't care about it, do they care about us? I mean, I just don't really feel all that loved at the moment. If Wizards knew Theros was coming and knew it had enchantment Creatures, why didn't they sort of give us hints to how we can use this enchantment. If I knew we could have enchantment creatures or artifacts then I wouldn't have gone the way I did. Heck it was basically a tie between the two first choices why couldn't we have an enchantment land?


"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Justice_Theurge wrote:


I think that Wizards cared about it.  I think they still care about it.  There were errors, but I don't think it was because of not caring enough.  It's just that sometimes a lot of little things go wrong.


Does Wizards love you?  Well... love might be a strong word.  But if you see a Wizards employee you might be able to score a hug.


"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."


TinGorilla wrote:


Justice_Theurge wrote:

There are certainly lessons to be learned.  My guess is that the biggest one is to lay the potential process out before things begin and ask for input on it.  My guess is that they didn't see the restrictions on where card ideas could come from being an issue, and just about everything else that has gone haywire probably could have been avoided with a couple of days of community comment.


It's too bad that things have been like this.  I feel like the people doing this were really excited about it at the beginning and wanted it to be successful and fun like the previous two.  You Make the Card is a good contest, it just needs a little tuning.


The thing is we shouldn't be in training still. This is the fourth YTMC, and though I only have participated in one before (Vanish into Memory) it went far more smoothly, so it seemed that WOTC had figured out how to do this sort of thing. Now it feels like a chaotic side show. Strange, but not particularly upsetting.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

RPJesus wrote:


mulen wrote:

not all the split cards are made to have the // be and.


Boom // Bust


Order // Chaos


Illusion // Reality


Profit // Loss


I think waste not//want not would fit in well with those


Boom and Bust.
Order and Chaos.
Illusion and Reality.
Profit and Loss.
Waste Not and Want Not.


One of these things is not like the other. Granted, Waste not and want not is probably grammatically correct, but it sounds awkward given that the phrase is typically Waste not, want not.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Jakusotsu wrote:


Though I like some of the other names better, I voted for Spoils of Misery because that's how Ethan must be feeling about this.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

OmegaM wrote:

 

I voted for Carpe Noctem because it's clever and fits the abilities well enough (someone discards something, and then when no one is looking, i.e., at night, you sneak in and salvage something from it). Waste Not would be my second choice, but it seems more like the name of a green card, since green is all about conserving nature. The other names are either too generic or wrong (like Skullduggery).

 

I wonder if they'll cut to the top 4 and then to the top 2. It might be a good idea unless one name clearly beats the rest.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Potato-Dragon wrote:


I thought that "Carpe Noctem" was the coolest-sounding name, but then again I'm an amateur linguist. So I thought it wouldn't be a high pick. Apparently I was mistaken, if the board is representative of the people who vote on the Wizards.com site.

 

Now don't get me wrong, as I would love to see a card with that name someday, but in regards to what the card actually does... I feel that "spoils of misery" describes it better, so that's my actual vote.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Qilong wrote:

BorosGreengrocer wrote:
Poor Carpe Noctem.

I hope Waste Not doesn't win. Not that there's anything wrong with the name, but I don't think something a Wizards person came up with should win at the expense of the community's suggestions.


I started opting for Waste Not because it had a certain appeal to it: the name seems to fit from the idea of salvaging things. But the phrase  "waste not" is about being thrifty, about not expending more than you need and using the leftovers (of your own work) for some purpose. Whilst this has some application, the effect is not about you holding on to lost resources, such as conserving mana that might go to waste [Upwelling] or gaining some benefit off of cards you've discarded [Dredge, Delve]. Instead, it's just adding on to the effect other cards you do to someone else. So, I don't think the effect matches the name, cool as it is.


My option on this final vote was Spoils of Misery, as that is exactly what is happening: The dude is gaining from others' loss, like digging through a trashbin to find information key to another's misfortune, or to cause it. I'd say Drudge Rummage would work, too -- but the name just sounds like it attempts to be clever and its cleverness doesn't fit the card. What, exactly, is the drudge here? Skullduggery refers some something entirely different; Necroharvest suggests digging up dead bodies, but that's not the case; "Seize the Night"? What does this card have to do with the "night"? Couldn't I do this during the day? Riches from Rags is also trying to be clever where it doesn't work.


So, my vote is for Spoils of Misery.

"Words of power never disappear. They sleep, awaiting those with the will to rouse them."

Sign In to post comments