2009/3/9 Sebastian Sylvan <sebastian.syl...@gmail.com> > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Bulat Ziganshin < > bulat.zigans...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello Sebastian, >> >> Monday, March 9, 2009, 1:08:50 PM, you wrote: >> >> i think we should make 2-stage voting, like in F1 >> >> after 1st stage we will know which logos are most popular and >> therefore are real candidates, so we can select among them >> >> > > One of the reasons condorcet voting is good is that this isn't needed. If > everyone is consistent in which logos they prefer the results from second > voting stage will be identical to just picking the condorcet voting from the > first stage. > > The interface to the condorcet voting site is actually pretty good (try out > one of the samples), so it's pretty easy to just "move to top" the ones you > prefer and move the ones you dislike to the bottom. Then you can ignore the > vast majority of "don't care" logos in the middle, and just fine tune your > ranking at the top and bottom. >
With so many candidates, I think a two-stage process would be helpful. For example, what if a variant of a logo I liked ended up being popular, but I missed that one and didn't rank it (not unreasonable, there are a hundred logos). After the top candidates have been selected, I will surely notice it up there. Of course, introducing multi-stage voting breaks some of the properties we'd like a voting system to have. But, alas, you (provably) can't have it all :-) Luke
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
