DeletedUser
Guest
I'm sure we could work gerrymandering into it somehow too. :icon_wink:
DeletedUser
Guest
Will close the poll at 23:00:00 ST 07/11/11, ranks 1-3 will move on and ranks 4-5 will have a one-vote-only head to head where, as opposed to the last polls where you could've put both players, you have to pick one.
DeletedUser
Guest
Lol, rep is winning 
DeletedUser
Guest
At the moment its looking like Greg and SF as the 4th and 5th but still time to go, the reason we'd be doing a one vote only head to head is simply to determine who truly is the more popular poster. Players that voted both in the previous rounds would have to pick one or the other, much like the final round will be...
DeletedUser
Guest
Sounds like dragging it out to me.
DeletedUser
Guest
Maybe it is, maybe there'll be a different result, can't really know until it happens. The point is just that there COULD be a difference so we'll see what happens.
DeletedUser
Guest
We could just do a repeat of these 9 names, you never know, there could be a difference. In fact, why not make it into a best of three, to eliminate flukes?
DeletedUser
Guest
We need to increase the sample size and use a more fair way to pick the winner, say to draw it out of a hat? :icon_redface:
Just using hyperbole, but I get the point that Rukoh is making and agree. There is no point in dragging it out any further then necessary with a redundant round set-up.
DeletedUser
Guest
Doing that doesn't change the method, so yeah we'd be insane expecting different results doing the same thing.
You have to choose between two players, you can't like both like the first round. Its the only way to find out which of the two is more popular, and which should move on to the next rounds that will have the same one vote method.
DeletedUser
Guest
The one with the most votes in this round is more popular. In fact, this is increasingly apparent as the gap between the #4 and #5 widens. I don't think I've seen a single person comment that they agree with holding a run-off between 4 and 5. Seems silly to adhere to an unpopular decision.
DeletedUser
Guest
I think you've missed the boat here Aaron;
We get why you're saying that fourth and fifth should have a "vote-off";
But the problem is that it's redundant; it just increases the length of the competition for no apparent reason.
Why?
Because we could (and as Rukoh and others have pointed out) should just take the top 4 and move into the next round, without a need for a tie-breaker of sorts. Why? Because whoever places 4th (minus the event of an actual tie between 4th and 5th, of course) will have already garnered more votes from the public, in a vote where people could vote for both, either, or neither. Point is, in a poll with pretty much unlimited choice, 4th will be above 5th. You know, hence the ordinal ranking!
In most competitions (well, not official ones with caps) but ones where you get an odd number of people and you want to head to head styles to go through the usual 32-16-8-4-2-1 style; people just find a stage to cut off at. We had 9 participants, and now we are at 5? Instead of adding an extra stage, we could just do the following:
1) Stage one - X participants - Y go through because of a draw
2) Stage Two (should be unaffected by the draw in stage one, really) - out of those remaining Y, just take Z [an even number] to go through and the rest are eliminated.
3) Stage Three - If you wanted to add another stage, could do 2 top going through from the top 4,
4) Stage 4 - Final stage.
However, adding in the extra stage after 2 is just unnecessary. Taking the top 4 will streamline the competition and not breach any issues of fairness.
We get why you're saying that fourth and fifth should have a "vote-off";
But the problem is that it's redundant; it just increases the length of the competition for no apparent reason.
Why?
Because we could (and as Rukoh and others have pointed out) should just take the top 4 and move into the next round, without a need for a tie-breaker of sorts. Why? Because whoever places 4th (minus the event of an actual tie between 4th and 5th, of course) will have already garnered more votes from the public, in a vote where people could vote for both, either, or neither. Point is, in a poll with pretty much unlimited choice, 4th will be above 5th. You know, hence the ordinal ranking!
In most competitions (well, not official ones with caps) but ones where you get an odd number of people and you want to head to head styles to go through the usual 32-16-8-4-2-1 style; people just find a stage to cut off at. We had 9 participants, and now we are at 5? Instead of adding an extra stage, we could just do the following:
1) Stage one - X participants - Y go through because of a draw
2) Stage Two (should be unaffected by the draw in stage one, really) - out of those remaining Y, just take Z [an even number] to go through and the rest are eliminated.
3) Stage Three - If you wanted to add another stage, could do 2 top going through from the top 4,
4) Stage 4 - Final stage.
However, adding in the extra stage after 2 is just unnecessary. Taking the top 4 will streamline the competition and not breach any issues of fairness.
DeletedUser
Guest
You know, that may just be what he is aiming for. The polls are a good addition to the otherwise shoddy blogs that this world has had, and are the one feature which actually garner reader interest- the rest of the material there seems to be generic comments and personal opinions with little relevance to the world. So, makes sense for the blogger to continue them and get some positive reader interest for a change, even if all of you don't want it lengthened.
Repinski
Guest
1st, with you being the new blogger you should keep this going through to the finals and if there was a reward (not sure) have Army supply it as it was a promise he/she made at the start.
DeletedUser
Guest
He, and I'll talk to 1st sometime this weekend
DeletedUser
Guest
1) Start poll for blog.
2) Drag poll out for unnecessary length of time.
3) Quit blog, making entire exercise redundant.
2) Drag poll out for unnecessary length of time.
3) Quit blog, making entire exercise redundant.
DeletedUser
Guest
DeletedUser
Guest
1) Bump a sticky? Cool story bro.
2) I guess I missed the part where it says only people involved are allowed to post here. /goes and makes a 'no ArmyOfLoners' thread
3) Umadbro?
DeletedUser
Guest
1) Title "Blog Poll"
2) No longer W56 Blogger
3) to 1st [11/8/2011 6:29:40 PM] Aaron: btw, finish off the forum contest however you like
2) No longer W56 Blogger
3) to 1st [11/8/2011 6:29:40 PM] Aaron: btw, finish off the forum contest however you like
Repinski
Guest
[11/11/2011 3:18:07 PM | Edited 3:18:13 PM] Repinski (Nuketech): Hey finish out ArmyOfLoner's poll thing
[11/11/2011 3:18:26 PM] 1stphoenix: yeh yeh, caught me on another away weekend
[11/11/2011 3:18:34 PM] 1stphoenix: and, gotta resend a few hundred attacks...
[11/11/2011 3:18:41 PM] 1stphoenix: real ones too
[11/11/2011 3:18:43 PM] Repinski (Nuketech): |-( It takes 2m to make a poll
[11/11/2011 3:19:26 PM] 1stphoenix: lol, 2 minutes I dont have at the mo?
[11/11/2011 3:19:34 PM] 1stphoenix: Il get aaron to finish it, and give me the results
[11/11/2011 3:20:23 PM] Repinski (Nuketech): lol k
:lol:
[11/11/2011 3:18:26 PM] 1stphoenix: yeh yeh, caught me on another away weekend
[11/11/2011 3:18:34 PM] 1stphoenix: and, gotta resend a few hundred attacks...
[11/11/2011 3:18:41 PM] 1stphoenix: real ones too
[11/11/2011 3:18:43 PM] Repinski (Nuketech): |-( It takes 2m to make a poll
[11/11/2011 3:19:26 PM] 1stphoenix: lol, 2 minutes I dont have at the mo?
[11/11/2011 3:19:34 PM] 1stphoenix: Il get aaron to finish it, and give me the results
[11/11/2011 3:20:23 PM] Repinski (Nuketech): lol k
:lol:
DeletedUser
Guest
Rep, you just want your cheating self to win this....
