Hang on Mike, we have all voted for our choices, 50% + one should be enough for a winner, that is conclusive in such a small sample, and we have a clear winner, why then change the rules so late, and call another vote on the lines of PR,where the player who is the favourite choice in FPTP, could come last.

Ern

__________________
Ern

If another person voted for Pietersen or Harrison now then Keedy's margin would be reduced and the margin may not be conclusive. If someone objected I would most likely ask voters to vote another way by assigning 4 points for 1st choice, 3 points for 2nd choice etc so we can get a fairer result. By the way, what does PR and FPTP stand for?

__________________
Administrator

first past the post/proportional reprisentation

__________________
I have a dream.... (Martin Luther King)

I'm quite sympathetic to Ernest's protestations here.. as it does rather smack of moving the goalposts.. but as the setting up of the poll has preceded all discussion of what would constitute a sensible basis for the poll (and as it was Mike, who actually voted for the winning candidate in the poll) who raised the issue.. I don't see there's a problem with restarting things.

On a point of principle.. it does strike me that some sort of system that finds a consensus candidate (rather than a first past the post system) would be most appropriate for a poll of this nature: everyone has their favourites.. but if we could find a compromise candidate that satisfied a lot of contributers then the result WOULD be more meaningful.

That said.. doesn't really worry me this time around as I've no very strong feelings for any one candidate!

I think the poll is a good way to determine whether any particular candidate stands out. If one does, and they have a meaningful margin, ie daylight between them and the others, then no need to take another vote. However, since we all would like the winner to be conclusive doing a second vote with points is an obvious alternative should the first poll be close.

At this stage Keedy has double the votes of the next ranked player so that is pretty conclusive and a second vote is not required if that margin remains.

__________________
Administrator

We set out on a first past the post system of voting, which the rules say are 50%+1, that is the rules, now Keedy is leading by 2 votes at the moment, if he was leading by only one vote, that vote should count, buton the other hand Milke, if the remaining votes put the scores level, then there would have to be another vote.

To be honest I dont like PR, by definition it means the most popular choice is not likely to be an outright winner, but if you wanted to go down that road, you should have said before the poll started.IMHO.

__________________
Ern

Goddamnit you lot! Does no one want to vote for Jefferson?!? Does no one want to see a giant play for England? Grrrr. And after I'd decided to vote for Harrison! How do you think I felt voting for Harrison when I knew the Jefferson was friendless? Oh well! I'm sure he'll show you all to be wrong and end up playing for England in ignominious failure and getting dropped after one test to join John Stephenson in the 'one test wonders' club. Who'll be laughing then, eh?

And as for these voting shenanegans... I don't care - unless the person with no votes suddenly wins; showing Jefferson to be the popular choice after all!

Seriously though, is there any way to set up a poll in such a way as to have some kind of preference. At my old university, they used to have a voting system where you got 3 preference votes. Your first preference got 3 votes, 2nd got 2 and 3rd got 1. I would have liked to have set up my 'county polls' in this manner, to give a bit more choice. Future hack?

Andy,
Let me be honest and say I dont like any kind of PR, and that is what you are saying here, but that aside.

Now if that was in place,I could say, and problably would, that I need not vote.

Having said that, you cant bring in that sort of voting system when you are only voting for one person, it just can't be done, think of the mechanics.

That sort of voting is normaly mooted or used for a multi choice elections, not one small poll voting for a simple winner.

Ern

__________________
Ern

Right, only one vote separating Harrison and Keedy. At this stage we could start another poll with Keedy and Harrison starting on the votes they are on now. I could easily do that in the database. Then the remaining 7 people who didn't vote for either Harrison or Keedy could either give their vote to one of these guys or not. That will either bring Harrison and Keedy level or divide them further. If they ended up level they could be declared joint winners.

Then you are asking the other 7 voters to vote for a player "Keedy" or "Harrison" who they did not vote for in the first place.

__________________
Ern