Re: 1st, 2nd, 3rd OR 1st only: Please Vote

[Donald]

As many of you are aware, I've now been moderating the Monthly Challenge for a few months.

Previously people were asked to nominate their 1st, 2nd & 3rd choices. But because of workload demands in collating responses that was changed and you were asked to nominate only one as the winner.

I'm now inviting you to complete the poll at the top of this thread. I've worked out a way of doing 3, 2, 1 (if that's what people would like) that shouldn't take up too much more time than logging one choice only.

Don't know if it helps, but the way voting is treated under the different systems is:

One vote only
1 point awarded to image voted for. Image with most votes wins.

1st, 2nd, 3rd
3 points given to 1st choice; 2 points to 2nd choice; 1 point to 3rd choice
Number of points added up at end of voting.

So, an image that got lots of '2nd', but maybe only a one or two '1st', might beat an image that got more '1st', but no '2nd' or '3rd'

So let me know what you'd prefer, via the poll above.

The poll will close 5 days after the above date of posting this message.

[Mike Buckley]

Before I cast my vote in this poll, I would like to learn why people think one way is better than the other. I'm having difficulty understanding the difference in the expected outcomes when using the two methods of voting. Perhaps it's good that I never tried to be a statistician.

[Donald]

Mike

Don't know if it helps, but the way voting is treated under the different systems is:

One vote only
1 point awarded to image voted for. Image with most votes wins.

1st, 2nd, 3rd
3 points given to 1st choice; 2 points to 2nd choice; 1 point to 3rd choice
Number of points added up at end of voting.

So, an image that got lots of '2nd', but maybe only a one or two '1st', might beat an image that got more '1st', but no '2nd' or '3rd'

[Mike Buckley]

1st, 2nd, 3rd
3 points given to 1st choice; 2 points to 2nd choice; 1 point to 3rd choice
Number of points added up at end of voting.

Ahhhhhhh. That makes perfect sense. You might want to consider adding that information to the first post of the thread for the people who understandably don't take the time to read the other posts.

Thanks for the explanation!

[Plumcrak]

Even though voting for just ONE winner has been very difficult the past few months I still like that way of doing it. I may be in the minority on this one but that is OK with me...I don't normally go with the flow anyways. Maybe if people didn't create such wonderful images it would be easier

[Designer]

Donald, I would like to vote more than once in this poll.

[Donald]

I'd still welcome more votes on this. See the question in Post #1 and the poll at the top of the thread.

[NorthernFocus]

donald, i would like to vote more than once in this poll.

+1,2,3 :d

[Mike Buckley]

So, an image that got lots of '2nd', but maybe only a one or two '1st', might beat an image that got more '1st'

I didn't take that into consideration. Now that I have, can I change my vote?

Considering that the voting is split almost exactly half and half, I recommend not making a change. Change should be made only if there is a compelling reason and there seems to be none.

[pnodrog]

Donald I do not know how automated you make the system but if you made it a 1st 2nd 3rd vote system and awarded say 7pt for 1st, 4pt for 2nd and 2pt for 3rd it would be very hard for a photograph predominantly voted as 2nd to topple a photo with more 1st place votes and very few other votes. Entering the place votes into a spread sheet would sort this biased points method out easily.

[Donald]

All comments are being taken into account and will be factored in to a final decision.

Entering the place votes into a spread sheet would sort this biased points method out easily.

That's exactly how it's done.

[WJT]

Donald, I have voted for the current system but would love to see the graph style results posted like the regular competitions so that those who don't place can see how they went. If it is simple enough that is and not extra work.

[andrewaxford]

Donald, I have voted for the current system but would love to see the graph style results posted like the regular competitions so that those who don't place can see how they went. If it is simple enough that is and not extra work.

I think that's a great idea as I enter the monthly competition all the time and have never been placed. I have no more idea now if i am making any progress than I did when I entered the first. That seems a waste of a resource to me. Andrew

[Donald]

Okay, the people have spoken

Unless you live in a 'grown up' democracy where proportional representation that truly represents the will of the people is the means by which you elect your governments (sorry, that's just a political dig!), the first-past-the-post means system 50% +1 is what counts. Therefore, we have a decision.

We stick with the status quo for the foreseeable future.

In terms of graphically representing the results, I will have a look at that. I am conscious however that, very often, voting coalesces around a few images. This means that some people receive no votes. I am reluctant to expose those people to the knowledge that they got no votes. After all, what we're trying to do is encourage the development of knowledge and learning, not expose what some people might think of as 'failure'. Leave this one with me.

[tbob]

As an only occasional participant in the monthly challenge I am not sure if my opinion should be allowed to outweigh the regulars. That having been said; I would prefer not to know if I got zero votes. My little ego is too fragile for such rough handling. Ignorance is bliss.

[Antonio Correia]

One please.

[WJT]

Okay, the people have spoken

Unless you live in a 'grown up' democracy where proportional representation that truly represents the will of the people is the means by which you elect your governments (sorry, that's just a political dig!), the first-past-the-post means system 50% +1 is what counts. Therefore, we have a decision.

We stick with the status quo for the foreseeable future.

In terms of graphically representing the results, I will have a look at that. I am conscious however that, very often, voting coalesces around a few images. This means that some people receive no votes. I am reluctant to expose those people to the knowledge that they got no votes. After all, what we're trying to do is encourage the development of knowledge and learning, not expose what some people might think of as 'failure'. Leave this one with me.

It's a good point you make Donald, but to counter that I think that those who receive votes will be greatly encouraged by their polling and possibly improvement. Perhaps a compromise could be that the top ten (example only) may get to see that they polled votes or nearly got there. It's also for those who voted to see how the entrant that they voted for went.

[Pinecone]

I was too late to vote due to holidays etc, however, for what it is worth I would simply like to see all the number of votes given for each entry with the winner being the highest scored. If I came near last or got none then I would understand my entry was not good. Next time if I got some more votes then I would be encouraged and feel better with my effort, and that I am not just wasting my time. Never knowing how others judge your entry is unrewarding. Some times the competition subject is hard and few people enter, other times it sparks imagination and plenty enter, as such different standards eventually emerge and one can see improvements based on knowledge gained. Those who win often set the target, and by seeing how one fares against the experts is something to be appreciated, not knowing is discouraging.

[Jeff S]

I'm not surprised that many photos receive few or even zero votes under this system. After all, we vote for only what we think is the "best" image, which automatically assigns everyone else no vote - i.e. a zero. Even assuming roughly a third of the photos might reasonably be considered the "best" under whatever subjective evaluation voters might choose to use, that still reasonably leaves lots of really good (but perhaps not "the best") photos without any votes. Perhaps a few more than the top two or three images could be tallied and shown, whatever Donald feels is representative of the usual spread. The rest of us could just assume we barely missed this time and leave our collective fragile egos intact. At least this way perhaps every now and again we might slip into that 4th, 5th, or 6th, etc. slot and be able to see some progress now and again.

Of course under the current system, if I ever end up with one of the top couple of images I'm going to go out on the town that evening, find some new pubs, and sample the finest beverages available in each one, just to celebrate the occasion.

[WJT]

I suppose another vote is out of the question???