Time to rationalize!


#1

You know, I was just looking over the votes in more detail. Believe it or not, there was a tie between two people for the most number of 1st places received. Not surprisingly, one was first-prize winner jEd. But quite surprisingly, the other one was next-to-last-place me. Each of us had five people rank us first (if my tally is correct).

So, if there’s a lesson to be learned for next year’s LDS crowd, it’s this: when going for straight-up bribe, don’t do what I did. Specifically, I said I’d give stuff to the people who ranked me first, but I gave no incentive for any other ranking. Thus, if someone didn’t feel inclined to rank me first, it was likely that he/she would rank me 7th. :stuck_out_tongue:

Either that, or if you’re going to do what I did, campaign madly for Catbert to change the structure of final round, so that people can only choose one person that they feel ought to win (sorta like a presidential election :-P).

:wink:


#2

No, I prefer IRV.


#3

Even though this is not IRV at all.


#4

Originally posted by syphonhail
[B]No, I prefer IRV. [/B]

Hmmm…I would’ve tied for second with Dan under IRV, and jEd still would’ve come out the winner. Still, second place would’ve been better than second-to last. :wink:


#5

Hmmm…And if anyone cares about my nerdiness to actually calculate the results under IRV, here it is!

[list]7. Jenny (5.3% after 1st run-off)

  1. Alan/Pat/Dre (10.5% after 1st run-off, 10.5% after 2nd run-off each)

  2. Dan (10.5% after 1st run-off, 15.8% after 2nd run-off, 26.3% after 3rd run-off)/Matt (26.3% after 1st run-off, 26.3% after 2nd run-off, 26.3% after 3rd run-off)

  3. jEd (26.3% after 1st run-off, 26.3% after 2nd run-off, 47.4% after 3rd run-off, 100% after 4th run-off)[/list]