Futurama   Planet Express Employee Lounge
The Futurama Message Board

Design and Support by Can't get enough Futurama
Help Search Futurama chat Login Register

PEEL - The Futurama Message Board    PEEL Vault    Poster of the Month    Q: How long should the actual POTM voting process last? A: 5 days « previous next »
 Topic locked! 
Author Topic: Q: How long should the actual POTM voting process last? A: 5 days  (Read 415 times)
Pages: [1] Print
PEE Poll: How long should the actual POTM voting process last?
3 days   -1 (4%)
5 days   -9 (36%)
7 days   -8 (32%)
until someone comes out as a clear cut winner   -7 (28%)
Total Voters: 18

[-mArc-]

Administrator
Liquid Emperor
**
« on: 04-25-2011 12:44 »
« Last Edit on: 04-26-2011 13:38 »

You may vote for each choice you support and you may change your choice. Poll is open for one day.
[-mArc-]

Administrator
Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #1 on: 04-25-2011 13:01 »

My vote: up to 5 days should be enough. I don't like leaving the poll open for an undetermined time since someone has to step in at some point and call it. That sounds like it would call for trouble at some point.
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #2 on: 04-25-2011 13:28 »

Definitely 5 or 7, that should give most everyone enough time to vote, whereas 3 is very short and easily missed by some. And leaving it open till we have a clear winner is no good either.
Otis P Jivefunk

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #3 on: 04-25-2011 14:31 »

As I said with the nomination process, 7 days here as well. If it's a tie, then wait until exactly 7 days have gone right up until the last minute so it's exactly 7 days to be fair. No closing it at 6 and a half days to prevent a tie, it should be exactly 7 days to the minute, and if it's a tie it's a tie...
[-mArc-]

Administrator
Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #4 on: 04-25-2011 15:16 »

With the options 3, 5, 7, a tie could still be resolved with a tie breaking poll.
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #5 on: 04-25-2011 15:27 »

Or with a joined-win, we had 2 people winning before and I don't see a problem with that since some month there have been 2 posters who are equally good.
Xanfor

Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #6 on: 04-25-2011 16:14 »

Do we want to continue that, or do we want to prevent it from happening again?
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #7 on: 04-25-2011 16:28 »

Well, that's a good question, considering it only ever happened 3 times all together.
Xanfor

Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #8 on: 04-25-2011 16:36 »

Here's a question: If someone wins in a tie, are they allowed to win again within whatever time period we finally decide on? Seems like something that might generate controversy in the future.
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #9 on: 04-25-2011 16:54 »

Only if they win again in a tie causing it to be one whole win for the 12 month of course wink



No, just kidding, a win is a win.
Tweek

UberMod
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #10 on: 04-25-2011 19:27 »

Three days; in recent months I'd started editing polls so they closed after three days; I was fed up of being accused of favouritism when I closed it when somebody I liked was in the lead tongue
Xanfor

Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #11 on: 04-25-2011 19:34 »
« Last Edit on: 04-25-2011 19:35 »

After much delibearation, I have decided to support the clear-cut option. There should be only one winner, and this way is simpler than having run-offs. Although I don't have a problem with run-offs if they are occasionally required.
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #12 on: 04-25-2011 19:38 »

But is 1 vote clear cut?
Xanfor

Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #13 on: 04-25-2011 19:53 »

We should have a cut-off time, after which one vote will decide the winner in the case of a tie. Either five or seven days works from my perspective.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #14 on: 04-25-2011 20:11 »

Three days; in recent months I'd started editing polls so they closed after three days; I was fed up of being accused of favouritism when I closed it when somebody I liked was in the lead tongue

I recall this happening a few times, not necessarily recently.  I wasn't aware that you felt that way Tweek; I assumed it was off-hand remarks because people were disappointed their favorite hadn't won, and then they got over it.  From my perspective, waiting for a "clear-cut" winner usually worked itself out, although there are quite a few instances where the vote was close enough by 1 vote that it kept swapping repeatedly.

With PEEL 2.0 features, we can set limits on polls, and even edit in new polls for tie-breakers, and now that I think over all the material, this may be the best way to do it.  In my mind, this would be more of a guideline for whomever makes the thread/poll in the first place, but could be forgotten and left alone if nobody cared enough either way... but defining it sharply with a set number of days does sound enticing.
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #15 on: 04-25-2011 20:15 »

If we need a clear winner I say we rather have a tie-breaker poll than "whoever gets the 1st tie break vote after the time limit wins". That could easily abused by people using fake accounts/secondary accounts, if anyone wanted to do so.
Rather have everyone who cares caste their vote for one of the 2 (or more) people in the tie again.
Xanfor

Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #16 on: 04-25-2011 20:17 »

That works. Agreement is fun!
futurefreak

salutatory committee member
Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #17 on: 04-25-2011 20:27 »

I said clear winner and by that I mean they have a minimum percentage of voting population, like 30% or something.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #18 on: 04-25-2011 20:37 »

If we need a clear winner I say we rather have a tie-breaker poll than "whoever gets the 1st tie break vote after the time limit wins". That could easily abused by people using fake accounts/secondary accounts, if anyone wanted to do so.
Rather have everyone who cares caste their vote for one of the 2 (or more) people in the tie again.

I concur with what you said.  However, I don't agree with your reasons.  You don't honestly think mArc allows a rampant problem like fake accounts to parade about on his message board.... do you?

Furthermore, if there were any fake accounts... do you honestly think that their pre-occupation is to try and influence POTM?
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #19 on: 04-25-2011 20:42 »

Some people have secondary accounts that everyone knows of (like Nasty & chay [and no I don't think they'd do it]), so the possibility that someone else has one is not zero.

Also you can easily make a new account quickly. So if you are tied in 1st place and really want to win you could easily influence that.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #20 on: 04-25-2011 20:45 »

To be frank... people wouldn't notice the difference either way.  Also, anyone willing to go to that much trouble is probably deranged...... it's just POTM after all. roll eyes
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #21 on: 04-25-2011 20:50 »

Of course, but it's still nicer if we'd have a new tie-breaker poll so everyone could cast their choice again. Only needs to stay open for 24 (or max 48) hours anyway.
winna

Avatar Czar
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #22 on: 04-25-2011 20:52 »

Like I said, I agree with your stated position. smile
totalnerduk

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #23 on: 04-26-2011 01:30 »

My vote: up to 5 days should be enough. I don't like leaving the poll open for an undetermined time since someone has to step in at some point and call it. That sounds like it would call for trouble at some point.

I like this. Seems clear cut and reasonable.
Nibblonian Leader

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #24 on: 04-26-2011 02:30 »

Five. Five days is perfect for voting. Doesn't last forever, doesn't fly by.
Xanfor

Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #25 on: 04-26-2011 02:38 »

Five days, five days, get your nominations up in five days.
Everybody's looking forward to voting on the weekend, weekend...
Otis P Jivefunk

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #26 on: 04-26-2011 13:30 »

Some people have secondary accounts that everyone knows of (like Nasty & chay [and no I don't think they'd do it])

I never knew that hmpf...
Pages: [1] Print 
 Topic locked! 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines | some icons from famfamfam
Legal Notice & Disclaimer: "Futurama" TM and copyright FOX, its related entities and the Curiosity Company. All rights reserved. Any reproduction, duplication or distribution of these materials in any form is expressly prohibited. As a fan site, this Futurama forum, its operators, and any content on the site relating to "Futurama" are not explicitely authorized by Fox or the Curiosity Company.
Page created in 0.125 seconds with 21 queries.