Last week I released a project that allows anyone to anonymously submit project ideas and then vote collectively on their favorites. The top voted project gets built.
Before launching the project, I submitted a few of my own ideas anonymously so the first visitors wouldn't see an empty list.
Over 500 people visited the site. They submitted 39 project ideas (some spammy, but mostly interesting). And 634 votes have been cast! I'm so grateful for all these people engaging with my project.
But here's the irony: my initial ideas are absolutely dominating.
They are the top 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 5th ranking ideas. I don't think it's because they are so much better than the other ideas. I think they had a huge advantage because they were there right from the start and got more eyes on them.
There are still 24 hours left of voting, but it looks like it would take a miracle for me to not win my own contest at this point.
I'm sharing this here because I'm fascinated by unanticipated consequences and accidental corruption.
Would love the hear your thoughts on it!
There are many ways to dilute the "first posted, most voted" effect without actually changing how votes get counted. In a way, it's a very similar problem to how voting happens in sites like HN. Mostly you can change how entries are displayed (hidden votes until done?), ordered (new first? random? less voted? trending?) and discovered (tags? keywords?).
In your specific case, next time you can try making sure you add a couple clearly bad ideas (off topic?), maybe one clearly placeholder (or kinda tutorial) idea and maybe some you can remove later could give you a good starting brew to grow user submitted content.
You can also somehow put the same projects to vote again, starting with zero votes. To have two projects done instead of one, maybe that's enough of an excuse.