Call for Submissions: “High-Quality VPS Topics”
To encourage everyone to share technically in-depth VPS content, the n/vps node is officially launching the “High-Quality VPS Topics” call for submissions. We want to see more than just subjective feelings of “is it good or not” — we’re looking for hardcore sharing backed by data, methodology, and conclusions. Whether you’re a seasoned veteran or a newcomer just getting started, as long as your content has value, you stand a chance to win rewards!
Submission Directions
The following types of original content are eligible to participate (not limited to these):
- Performance Benchmark Testing: Use tools such as UnixBench, Geekbench, iperf3, fio, sysbench, etc., to conduct real-world comparative tests on CPU / memory / disk IO / network throughput. Include full test commands and result screenshots.
- Network Route Quality Analysis: Use MTR, BestTrace, ping / traceroute with long-term sampling to compare packet loss, latency jitter, and routing path changes across different providers during peak and off-peak hours.
- Virtualization Solution Comparisons: Practical application or differential testing of virtualization technologies such as KVM / LXC / OpenVZ in terms of isolation, performance overhead, and resource overselling.
- Network Tuning Practices: Comparative effectiveness of congestion control algorithms like BBR / BBRv2 / SharpSpeed, as well as throughput and latency changes before and after TCP parameter tuning (
sysctlconfigurations). - Operations Automation: Hands-on sharing of Docker Compose orchestration solutions, Shell automation deployment scripts, and monitoring/alerting setups (e.g., Prometheus + Grafana / Uptime Kuma, etc.).
- Security Hardening Solutions: SSH hardening (key-based login, Fail2Ban), firewall policies (iptables / nftables / UFW), kernel security parameter tuning, and more.
- Troubleshooting Case Studies: Document a complete troubleshooting process — from symptom discovery, log analysis, root cause identification, to final resolution — showcasing your full diagnostic approach.
Participation Requirements
- Content must be original. Plagiarism or content spinning is prohibited.
- Posts must include reproducible steps or testing methods so that others can follow along.
- Feel free to include raw data (screenshots, log excerpts, test outputs) to let the data speak.
- Please select the appropriate tag (e.g., “Tutorial”) when posting.
- Posts that are purely subjective evaluations or lack substantive content will not be accepted.
Rewards
- All eligible posts will enter a candidate pool and be voted on by community members.
- Top 1 will receive 500–1000 Energy rewards (possibly with even better prizes) (provided by me personally).
- High-quality posts will receive priority pinned display for 7–14 days.
Event Schedule
- Submission Period: No deadline (if you submit on a voting day, your post will be deferred to the next voting cycle to give you enough time to make any final tweaks).
- Voting Period: Every month on the 7th, 14th, 21st, and 28th.
- Results Announcement: Approximately 24 hours after each voting period ends.
Selection Method
The selection process combines community voting + moderator scoring. After the voting period ends, the node moderator will make the final decision based on the voting results and evaluation criteria, and announce the winners.
Scoring Dimensions (Total 100 points)
| Dimension | Weight | Scoring Criteria |
|---|---|---|
| Technical Depth | 30 pts | Does it cover underlying principles, advanced operations, or unique insights, rather than simple out-of-the-box experiences or feature listings? |
| Data Completeness | 25 pts | Does it include sufficient test data (benchmark screenshots, MTR routes, iperf3 outputs, log excerpts, etc.)? Are conclusions supported by data? |
| Reproducibility | 20 pts | Can other members fully replicate the steps as described? Are commands, configurations, and environment details clearly provided? |
| Practical Value | 15 pts | Does the content offer practical reference value to community members? Can it help others solve specific problems or make better decisions? |
| Content Quality | 10 pts | Is the formatting clear? Is the structure logical? Are tags appropriate? Does the title accurately reflect the content? |
Scoring Guidelines for Each Dimension
Technical Depth (30 pts)
- 25–30 pts: Covers advanced topics such as kernel parameter tuning, virtualization internals, network protocol analysis, etc., with independent thinking and in-depth analysis.
- 15–24 pts: Includes some technical operations (e.g., Docker orchestration, automation scripts, security hardening) but does not address underlying principles.
- 5–14 pts: Primarily basic configuration tutorials with a low technical barrier.
- 0–4 pts: Purely subjective experience sharing with no technical content.
Data Completeness (25 pts)
- 21–25 pts: Multi-dimensional, multi-time-period testing with complete data, comparative analysis, and conclusions drawn from the data.
- 14–20 pts: Includes test data but with limited dimensions or only single-run results.
- 5–13 pts: Limited data or screenshots only, with little analysis.
- 0–4 pts: No data to support claims.
Reproducibility (20 pts)
- 17–20 pts: Environment, dependencies, commands, and configurations are fully listed so others can follow exactly.
- 11–16 pts: Main steps are clear, but some details (e.g., version numbers, prerequisites) are missing.
- 5–10 pts: Steps are vague, requiring readers to figure out a lot on their own.
- 0–4 pts: Not reproducible.
Practical Value (15 pts)
- 13–15 pts: Addresses common problems or fills a gap in community content, with broad applicability.
- 8–12 pts: Offers reference value for specific scenarios.
- 3–7 pts: Limited reference value.
- 0–2 pts: No clear practical value.
Content Quality (10 pts)
- 9–10 pts: Clear formatting, logical structure, accurate tags, no typos.
- 5–8 pts: Basically compliant but with minor issues.
- 0–4 pts: Poor formatting or incorrect tags.
Bonus Points (Additional +5–10 pts, capped at 100)
- Includes self-written scripts or open-source tools that others can use directly.
- Content has a series format, forming a complete body of knowledge.
- Actively responds to other people’s questions in the comments, fostering deeper discussion.
Veto Items
The following will result in immediate disqualification:
- Content is not original (plagiarized, spun, or with 50% or more AI-generated content).
- Falsified data or obvious fabrication of test results.
- Post contains promotional links or commercial referral content.
- Plagiarism or close imitation of content already published by other members.
Selection Process
- Submission Period: Members post in
n/vpswith the appropriate tag. - Candidate Pool Compilation: After the submission period ends, the moderator organizes eligible posts and publishes a candidate list.
- Community Voting: Members vote in the candidate post (each person can cast up to 3 votes).
- Comprehensive Assessment: The moderator combines voting results with the scoring criteria to determine final scores.
- Results Announcement: The winners and detailed score breakdowns are published.
Dispute Resolution
If you have any objections to the results, you may leave a comment below this post within 3 days of the announcement, stating your reasons. The moderator will review and respond publicly.
Friendly Reminders
- Not sure what to write? Start with a script you use in your daily operations, a tuning experience, or a pitfall you’ve encountered.
- Let the data speak for itself — benchmark screenshots, MTR routes, and iperf3 speed test results are all welcome.
- Beginners are also encouraged to participate. It’s not about how advanced your tools are, but whether your sharing is methodical, thoughtful, and valuable.
We look forward to everyone’s hardcore contributions. Together, let’s make n/vps a VPS exchange node with real technical substance!
The above activity rules and evaluation details take effect from the date of publication. If you have any questions, feel free to leave a comment below.
