# Add methods in the WCA profiles



## FJT97 (Jun 8, 2016)

Hi

I think it would be cool to see, which methods which people use. Then there could be a column next to the event in the wca database. and then you could sort the times by method. so you could easily see e.g. the fastest petrus solver out there, which would be kinda cool.
I think this could be easily implemented if you could choose the method in the procedure of registering for a competition.

The only problem might be that it is not always easy to distinguish between the methods (e.g. is 4lll LBL or cfop) But i think that if you just don't count the subsets it shouldn't be that big of a deal.

What do you think of it?


----------



## AlphaSheep (Jun 8, 2016)

Would be cool, but I don't think it is practical. People change methods, even within the same comp, even within the same round. For example, I have heard of people trying Roux for two solves and then reverting to CFOP for the last 3 solves.

It would also rely heavily on all of the fastest people with each method adding it to the site, so it wouldn't be that reliable.


----------



## Loiloiloi (Jun 8, 2016)

There is too many nuances and complications for this to be implemented correctly.


----------



## Petro Leum (Jun 8, 2016)

I dont want my ZZ and Hyeon Kyo Kyoung's "ZZ" to be in the same category. So no, thank you very much.


----------



## DGCubes (Jun 8, 2016)

Yeah, it really isn't possible, and it's the sort of thing that can change so often. It's not practical and people would probably just put joke answers.


----------



## Matt11111 (Jun 8, 2016)

Even if they had a list of methods people could choose from, what if you're like Tony Fisher and you created your own method with no knowledge of any others?


----------



## Loiloiloi (Jun 8, 2016)

Matt11111 said:


> Even if they had a list of methods people could choose from, what if you're like Tony Fisher and you created your own method with no knowledge of any others?


They could never include every known method


----------



## Lucas Garron (Jun 8, 2016)

This is not entirely unrealistic. We already allow uploading profile pictures, and the community would probably appreciate information like this (it would be cool to run statistics!)

I imagine we could have a list of known methods user, and users could select their base primary base method.

We could make it easy to request to add a new method to the list instead of choosing an existing one, but then someone trustworthy would need to make judgments about what counts as a distinct method and what descriptions to allow (e.g. does "CFOP with a little bit of VW" count as a separate method? What about "CFOP but I'm good at edge control and also know full ZBLL"?)


----------



## OLLiver (Jun 8, 2016)

Lucas Garron said:


> "CFOP but I'm good at edge control and also know full ZBLL"?)


Ahem ZB method.

I like this idea


----------



## Lucas Garron (Jun 9, 2016)

OLLiver said:


> Ahem ZB method.



Ah, but should edge control at the beginning of the solve count differently from edge control during F2L? ;-)


----------



## tx789 (Jun 9, 2016)

If might confuse non-cubers or newer cubers. If it were implemented. It could perhaps be view-able to people logged in. This idea has a lot of problems. Including how many people would actually use it.


----------



## Loiloiloi (Jun 9, 2016)

Personally, if this is actually being considered, even if it could be added, I think it shouldn't.

WCA is already time consuming for everyone who works on it as it is entirely run by the support of the community and volunteers, and adding more stuff for the staff to handle isn't going to help that. I think it's not WCA's job to sort out who the fastest people are for each method, that could be conducted through other websites, a spreadsheet, or even a sophisticated forum thread perhaps. WCA is best (in my opinion) as a minimalist site which shows everyone's times and profiles.


----------



## OLLiver (Jun 9, 2016)

Lucas Garron said:


> Ah, but should edge control at the beginning of the solve count differently from edge control during F2L? ;-)


good point. where you do EO During the solve seems to determine the method. if its EOLS/ZBLS/ZBF2L +ZBLL I think its very clearly ZB method


----------



## FJT97 (Jun 10, 2016)

AlphaSheep said:


> Would be cool, but I don't think it is practical. People change methods, even within the same comp, even within the same round. For example, I have heard of people trying Roux for two solves and then reverting to CFOP for the last 3 solves.



That wouldn't be that big of a deal. You just choose your main method then.




Lucas Garron said:


> This is not entirely unrealistic. We already allow uploading profile pictures, and the community would probably appreciate information like this (it would be cool to run statistics!)
> 
> I imagine we could have a list of known methods user, and users could select their base primary base method.
> 
> We could make it easy to request to add a new method to the list instead of choosing an existing one, but then someone trustworthy would need to make judgments about what counts as a distinct method and what descriptions to allow (e.g. does "CFOP with a little bit of VW" count as a separate method? What about "CFOP but I'm good at edge control and also know full ZBLL"?)



Thats what i thought. I think we could just start with the well known methods. And if anybody says that he thinks that his variant of e.g. cfop deserves a special name, then we could discuss that and maybe add some substeps as new methods. I think we should not add too many. It wouldn't be nice to compare then and it would confuse the people like tx789 said. But if we don't have too many it could be really nice to see.



tx789 said:


> If might confuse non-cubers or newer cubers. If it were implemented. It could perhaps be view-able to people logged in. This idea has a lot of problems. Including how many people would actually use it.


I can't really imagine, why people wouldn't use it. Its just about the definition of the methods. but most peoples methods aren't that hard to define.



Loiloiloi said:


> Personally, if this is actually being considered, even if it could be added, I think it shouldn't.
> 
> WCA is already time consuming for everyone who works on it as it is entirely run by the support of the community and volunteers, and adding more stuff for the staff to handle isn't going to help that. I think it's not WCA's job to sort out who the fastest people are for each method, that could be conducted through other websites, a spreadsheet, or even a sophisticated forum thread perhaps. WCA is best (in my opinion) as a minimalist site which shows everyone's times and profiles.



If it should be minimalistic, why are there profile pictures? Where does minimalism starts, where does it end?I think methods are just a really important part of cubing. Important enough to add it.


----------



## Calode (Jun 10, 2016)

What if someone made a website just for this kind of stuff. Login with their wca profile, write up a "profile." Quick write up of the method they use, algsets, etc... specify which algs they use (possibly link to algdb.net), have a link to their wca results, possibly list their cubesolv.es if possible (maybe with some tweaks to the database and opening up a REST API), youtube channel, etc...

People can then go to that site and look up people by their name or wca id and read up on them.


----------



## FJT97 (Jun 13, 2016)

Calode said:


> What if someone made a website just for this kind of stuff. Login with their wca profile, write up a "profile." Quick write up of the method they use, algsets, etc... specify which algs they use (possibly link to algdb.net), have a link to their wca results, possibly list their cubesolv.es if possible (maybe with some tweaks to the database and opening up a REST API), youtube channel, etc...
> 
> People can then go to that site and look up people by their name or wca id and read up on them.


i really like that idea. We need someone who wants to do this now.


----------



## YTCuber (Jun 13, 2016)

Cool idea, I like it!
I think i am going to write a prototype.
My feature list would be:

Login with WCA-ID + Password
User can put in the data (partly for each event): method, main, backup main, stickers, algs, goals, profile picture

Auto Import of WCA-Solves, cubesolv.es-solves


----------



## Ollie (Jun 13, 2016)

It would make the WCA Export a lot more interesting


----------



## Calode (Jun 14, 2016)

Ollie said:


> It would make the WCA Export a lot more interesting


I wouldn't use the WCA Export. It's all that exists now, but I would want to wait till WCA site has a REST api for results.


----------



## pjk (Jun 14, 2016)

Lucas Garron said:


> This is not entirely unrealistic. We already allow uploading profile pictures, and the community would probably appreciate information like this (it would be cool to run statistics!)


How does a user change their profile picture? How does a user update their method if they change?



FJT97 said:


> Hi
> 
> I think it would be cool to see, which methods which people use. Then there could be a column next to the event in the wca database. and then you could sort the times by method. so you could easily see e.g. the fastest petrus solver out there, which would be kinda cool.
> I think this could be easily implemented if you could choose the method in the procedure of registering for a competition.
> ...


On this note, would it be useful to add a profile field here on the forums for people to add their method, which will be displayed in their profile? I assume you mean method for 3x3 since that is the one that varies most?


----------



## stoic (Jun 14, 2016)

I'd imagine this is true:


DGCubes said:


> people would probably just put joke answers.


So, the answer to the question


pjk said:


> would it be useful to add a profile field here on the forums for people to add their method, which will be displayed in their profile?


possibly depends on how much it adds to the user experience to allow people to put endless variations on "CFOP and proud", "Rouxer til I die", "not telling" or "ECE with a hint of ABC and a twist of XYZ" as to whether it's worth doing.


----------



## FJT97 (Jun 14, 2016)

pjk said:


> On this note, would it be useful to add a profile field here on the forums for people to add their method, which will be displayed in their profile? I assume you mean method for 3x3 since that is the one that varies most?




Yep, That would be also cool!


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Jun 19, 2016)

Why not let people put anything, and have a "profile" of preferences, including favorite event, mains, etc? Haven't worked through the details, but it could be a good path to take.


----------



## FakeMMAP (Jun 19, 2016)

pjk said:


> How does a user change their profile picture? How does a user update their method if they change?
> 
> 
> On this note, would it be useful to add a profile field here on the forums for people to add their method, which will be displayed in their profile? I assume you mean method for 3x3 since that is the one that varies most?



ahem... there are at least 3 widespread 2x2 methods, sooo many pyraminx methods, and don't forget about BLD.
furthermore BLD would require specification of memo method, execution method and order.


----------



## pjk (Jun 20, 2016)

JustinTimeCuber said:


> Why not let people put anything, and have a "profile" of preferences, including favorite event, mains, etc? Haven't worked through the details, but it could be a good path to take.





FakeMMAP said:


> ahem... there are at least 3 widespread 2x2 methods, sooo many pyraminx methods, and don't forget about BLD.
> furthermore BLD would require specification of memo method, execution method and order.


Should I add fields for 2x2, 3x3, 4x4, 5x5, and BLD then? Or even "Cube mains" for each puzzle. If there is enough interest, I'll gladly add them. I've just went ahead and added a field for 3x3 method, which you can update in your personal details profile here:
https://www.speedsolving.com/forum/account/personal-details

I will also add this below avatars on posts if that is something people want. Let me know.


----------



## tx789 (Jun 20, 2016)

pjk said:


> Should I add fields for 2x2, 3x3, 4x4, 5x5, and BLD then? Or even "Cube mains" for each puzzle. If there is enough interest, I'll gladly add them. I've just went ahead and added a field for 3x3 method, which you can update in your personal details profile here:
> https://www.speedsolving.com/forum/account/personal-details
> 
> I will also add this below avatars on posts if that is something people want. Let me know.



I think the only thing that should be on posts is the main method for 3x3 and maybe the cube, perhaps your main event. But if any are added from what I listed it should be only two. Because we don't want people with 20+ fields on their posts listing all thier mains, favourite events, ect.

It could be cool to have method, and main event on posts. I wonder how many would use it? For methods I'd think people who didn't use CFOP would be more likely to use that feature.


----------



## mark49152 (Jun 20, 2016)

Isn't this what signatures are for?


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Jun 20, 2016)

You could have a thing where it says "add event" and then when you click it it gives you a name field for the event, a method field, and a main field. Then, there could be a drop-down menu or something that would show all of the events you entered so you could set a main. Then, only that one would be under your profile, like

<calendar thing> Aug 16, 2014
<location thing> st louis, mo
WCA: 2013BARK01
<rubik's cube symbol (favorite event)> 3x3x3
Solves: CFOP on Tanglong

it could be limited to a reasonable amount of characters so a troll couldn't say
CFOP with 4 WV algorithms, partial edge contro, full COLL, and 19 ZBLLs
and
Moyu Aolong v1 with purple instead of white, red instead of yellow, and pink instead of red, Cubicle weight 2 lube and perfect tensions bruh


----------



## xchippy (Jun 28, 2016)

There should just be a box on the WCA profile that the person can type whatever they want (including method). This would allow people seeing their profile to learn more about them and allow people that don't want to put things there not to put them there.


----------



## JustinTimeCuber (Jun 29, 2016)

xchippy said:


> There should just be a box on the WCA profile that the person can type whatever they want (including method). This would allow people seeing their profile to learn more about them and allow people that don't want to put things there not to put them there.


The only problem with that idea is that trolls might put stuff that is either completely unrelated to cubing or inappropriate in the box.


----------



## Calode (Dec 30, 2016)

So I was thinking recently about another project to work on and I came back to this after proposing something.

I'd make a website for profiles. People could write down various bits of info. They'd log in with their wca db account and then from there, edit their profile. Information that could be included would be their youtube channel among other things. Along with their pbs and mains and methods for various events including non-wca stuff. 

You'd go to something like me.cubing.net/2016HOOV01 to see someone's profile. 

Of course there's a lot more I can include. Your guys' thoughts on this?


----------



## efattah (Dec 30, 2016)

Opponents of 'method listing' are forgetting this is not just a curiosity. In fact, over time, logging methods could be a major contribution to the development of speed cubing in general. There are so many arguments all the time about this or that variant being faster and which new variant has potential. Some way of graphing these statistics would go a long way to show which new (or old) methods are showing promise. I'm not saying implementation is easy. Even just keeping track of the fastest time for a method would be of value. If, for example, a ZZ solver pulls off a crazy single or average, the solver could fill in a form and 'apply' for a possible (method) record on that single or average. This would eliminate huge overhead from every single solve having to have a method, but it would still keep track of the generally fastest singles & averages for each method.


----------



## aybuck37 (Dec 30, 2016)

there could be a drop down box with options. And one of them could be just the option custom


----------



## One Wheel (Dec 31, 2016)

What about an option for an individual to upload a reconstruction of a given solve? That way as far as the WCA database is concerned there is a very limited range of answers that can be included. If somebody wants to go through and classify those solves they can, and there's nothing wrong with publishing what they find, but then you don't have to worry about silly answers or weird hybrids of methods.


----------



## James Snowden (Dec 31, 2016)

But why not just put the method you use to solve in comps since declaring your main method, that way you can't put a joke answer as people could refer to the method claimed to be used and what was actually done. Also, I imagine that it would be very difficult to be method neutral and as fast as possible as inspection isn't realistically long enough to explore every method. Any way, there could be an option for method neutral if anybody considers themselves to be so.


----------



## Loiloiloi (Dec 31, 2016)

James Snowden said:


> But why not just put the method you use to solve in comps since declaring your main method, that way you can't put a joke answer as people could refer to the method claimed to be used and what was actually done. Also, I imagine that it would be very difficult to be method neutral and as fast as possible as inspection isn't realistically long enough to explore every method. Any way, there could be an option for method neutral if anybody considers themselves to be so.


The WCA doesn't record solutions and it would most likely be a huge waste of time to do so, so no we can't refer to how people "actually" solve in competitions.


----------



## pjk (Jan 13, 2017)

Calode said:


> So I was thinking recently about another project to work on and I came back to this after proposing something.
> 
> I'd make a website for profiles. People could write down various bits of info. They'd log in with their wca db account and then from there, edit their profile. Information that could be included would be their youtube channel among other things. Along with their pbs and mains and methods for various events including non-wca stuff.
> 
> ...


That URL isn't working for me. Can you update the URL so I can get a better of idea of what you're referring to?

While we're on this note of customizing profiles: I'm looking for someone to come on board and help implement customizations to speedsolving.com like what is being discussed here. If you're interested, please shoot me a PM. Thanks.


----------



## Loiloiloi (Jan 13, 2017)

pjk said:


> That URL isn't working for me. Can you update the URL so I can get a better of idea of what you're referring to?


His use of "something like" makes me think he's just providing an example of what the URL would look like.


----------

