[Sidepot]

We're getting close on the $5 chip, and through this initial voting process I think some things have become apparent, such as:

· Face-offs work well, and result in a clear winner typically. This type of voting seems to minimize any data bias.

· Polls for many chips at once are more problematic, and involve some inate biases (uniquely different chips have a natural advantage, rank order preferences are unknown, etc.)

· We have about 40-60 active voting participants.

· The lion's share of voting happens pretty quickly, and then votes trickle in at a slower, but steady pace. Thus for some face-offs, the result becomes apparent pretty quickly and the minimum 24-hour polling period (minimum default of the tool) may not even be necessary.

In light of what we've learned so far, I'd like to tweak the process going forward to ensure fairness and expediency. Here's the revised methodology proposal:

1. Open submissions, with 2nds required to advance to the general election.

2. General Election (24 hrs) - where each voter can vote for as many of the "seconded" chips as they like. No limit on number of votes, so if you like a similar group of chips, vote for every chip in it.

3. A Series of Tournament-Style Face-Offs (24 hrs or less)- Eliminateall chips that don't "pull their weight" (get more than 1/n percent of the total votes cast, where n=number of contestants) in the general election. Should get it down to 10 or so chips. Then do a series of NCAA Final Four style face-offs of the remaining chips, which will havle the remaining contestants each round. Similar chips will be matched up early. Then we'll try to match-up the biggest margin winners against the narrowist margin winners from th previous round (like seeding, but very informal)

Expediency of the Face-offs

As some face-offs are likely to produce clear winners in a much shorter time than the 24hr poll window, I think we can dramatically increase our cycle times and get thru the face-offs much quicker if we "call a winner" under the following pre-determined lopsided conditions:

· 70% After 30: If one chip has a 70% majority after a minimum of 30 votes, we "call the winner" (min vote would be 21 to 9 votes)

· 60% After 40: If one chip has a 60% majority after a minimum of 40 votes, we "call the winner" (min vote would be 24 to 16 votes)

Now on with the $5 chip vote, and since the "shades of purple" vote-off didn't produce an overwhelming winner (I believe it's a tie now for the top two), I think it's only fair that we face-off those two now, as well as all of the remaining chips still standing from the general election, so 3 face-offs:

5 vs 15 - (ongoing) Battle of the shades of purple
19 vs 2 - The winner of the general election versus the lowest remaining vote getter
1 vs 3 - The only other two left (6, 7, and 10 were all eliminated in the face-offs so far)


Remember, the quicker you vote, the quicker we'll do early calls on the results and move forward.

[FL70]

Seems to be a healthy system. Get many submissions - narrow to a few - vote to one- things move along.

Way to take charge SP.

My votes are in.

[grath]

Sidepot = Good

[Trav]

Just to clarify... Going forward (and on the current $5 chip) are we allowed to vote for our own chip???

[Sidepot]

Originally Posted by Trav

Just to clarify... Going forward (and on the current $5 chip) are we allowed to vote for our own chip???

Yes, if you feel your chip is truly the best. This shouldn't throw things off, and it would be problematic to police otherwise.

[Trav]

Great, thanks for the quick response!

[pankwindu]

Sidepot,

How about a locked, sticky "Currently Voting On" thread at the top of the forum? You make a new post whenever you've started the next voting round (possibly even include links to those threads/polls). Then we could subscribe to that thread to get email notification whenever a new vote is ready. Just a thought; might result in more early votes.

[Sidepot]

Originally Posted by pankwindu

Sidepot,

How about a locked, sticky "Currently Voting On" thread at the top of the forum? You make a new post whenever you've started the next voting round (possibly even include links to those threads/polls). Then we could subscribe to that thread to get email notification whenever a new vote is ready. Just a thought; might result in more early votes.

Great thought. I don't know how to do that, but I can ask Ten and X-files.