Voting?

[Tavis]

Whenever we have a Fan Art poll that consists of more than a handful of choices, there is some frustration over the outcome, especially when a much favored second best choice gets almost completely left out. To ease those kinds of frustrations, we sometimes followed an alternate 6-point poll system, where voters distribute points based on multiple favorites.<br><br>Because it was essentially made up on the spot, I would like to know whether such a voting system really is a viable one. If there is a better way to determine ranking for fan art in a single voting round, I would like to know.<br><br><!--QuoteBegin-Instructions for voting on the 6-point system+--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (Instructions for voting on the 6-point system)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> Voters will have six points to distribute among their choices in order to reward every side the voter supports. The winners of the voting process will then be determined in order by the highest sum.<br><br>If you do not want to mess with points, simply pick the top three choices and put them in order from best to least best. No problem, right? Using the 6-point system, they can be scored 3, 2, and 1 respectively.<br><br>A vote will list the choices and how many points each one obtains. There is no need to mention those choices that get zero votes.<br><br>If any of you really wish to get fancy, you may redistribute the 6 points among the choices in any way you please; you may even split them in half. Several typical combinations appear below.<br><br><b>For ties</b>:<br><i>Tie for 1st:</i> 2.5, 2.5, 1<br>(note the tie shares the 5 points total for 1st and 2nd place)<br><i>Tie for 2nd:</i> 3, 1.5, 1.5<br>(note the tie shares the 3 points total for 2nd and 3rd place)<br><i>Tie for 3rd:</i> 3, 2, .5, .5<br>(note the tie splits the point for 3rd place)<br><i>Tie for 1st and 3rd:</i> 2.5, 2.5, .5, .5<br>(sharing the points for 1st and 2nd, and splitting 3rd.)<br><i>3-way tie for first:</i> 2, 2, 2<br>(averaging the points across them)<br><i>3-way tie for second:</i> 3, 1, 1, 1<br>(share the 3 points across 2nd place)<br>etc<br><br><i>Hands-down lead:</i> 4,2 <i>or</i> 4,1,1 <i>or</i> 3.5,1.5,1 etc<br><i>Narrow lead:</i> 2.5,2,1.5 <i>or</i> 3,2.5,.5<br><i>Strong runoff:</i> 3,3<br>and so forth...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Gizensha]

The system you're using should be mathematically sound for the purposes of a fan art contest.<br><br>However...<br><br>MAM works fairly well for ranked votes <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://definecynical.mancubus.net/forum ... /smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> (and www.chessvariants.org are pretty much obsessed with it)<br><br><a href='http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~seppley/' target='_blank'>http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~seppley/</a> for the maths<br><br><a href='http://www.duniho.com/remote-mamcalc.php' target='_blank'>http://www.duniho.com/remote-mamcalc.php</a> for a web tool to do the maths for you if you give it the ballats<br><br><a href='http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~seppley/Com ... Runoff.htm' target='_blank'>http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~seppley/Com ... off.htm</a> for MAM vs Instant Run off<br><br><a href='http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~seppley/Com ... Winner.htm' target='_blank'>http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~seppley/Com ... ner.htm</a> for MAM vs Pathwinner

[norsenerd]

The idea of a method that gauruntees a Condorcet winner (liek Gizensha's method) may be considered but form the hard to falwo explination of this this method is nto oen of the better ways of takign care fo that.<br><br>Because of the fact that people are vottign for art I think a ratted aproval (as oposed to ranked) method that Tavis is talkigna botu is the way to go. The degree of flexability is a good thing in this method and I abrove of it's usage. If this isnt; to be falowed I would like singe transeferable vote but I dont; see any reason why a rated aproval method shoudl nto be used. I think that exactl what Tavis desrcibes woudl be good with moinor modifcycations. 6 is as good a number as any unless other poepl ahve some reason to chose another. I woudl liek a stipulation that requires people to use terminating decimals so some wise guy (liek myself) dons;t use pi as a ratign and sing hwo fractins may become dificult if used in tandom with decimals ro a wise guy (such as myself) decides to but 55/72 to one piece.

[DesertFoxCat]

We could just restrict it to integers and double the points if we really need that much flexability. <br><br>Simple is better, or just harder to mess up.

[norsenerd]

That's oen way but I rpefer the flexability.

[Gizensha]

If we go for a form of point system and don't want to rank all the pieces, I do think that there should be a number of ranked positions equal to half of the total amount of pieces rather than just the top three.<br><br>So if 8 entries then we'd have 10 rather than 6, and if four 3 rather than 6.

[Muninn]

This isn't the Noble Peace prize people, this is meant to be fun.<br><br>Please reconsider such convoluted methods, for the sake of the mathematically challenged.