ISRP Rules and Rulings Reference (OOC)The place to check for rulings, setting and area updates, seminars, new information, and where to participate in discussions for ISRP rooms changes and improvements.
As previously discussed Juxtaposition is being removed as a supported main setting. This vote is to determine its replacement. The marketplace, or something similar, will remain the main choice for the setting environment, with the second setting room to be determined largely by the patrons after the setting is decided.
The setting options are as follows:
Integrate the Marketplace with Greyhawk - Placing it in the same realm as CRT*
Integrate the Marketplace with Greyhawk - Placing it in a different realm than CRT*
Eberron
Forgotten Realms
Homebrew
Sigil/Planescape
*One or both subsettings could in theory still become more restrictive in nature pending the results of the Greyhawk poll, and the views of the patrons.
Following the final results of this poll, another discussion and poll will be held to determine the exact locale within the chosen setting. Additional discussions and polls will be held to determine other setting information, including but not limited to: second room theme/location, setting restrictions, setting features.
One more vote for the original planar gateway city...
Edit: As a side note, Adele: Will you be verifying votes to ensure that each individual only places one vote, rather than multiple user names of the same person voting multiple times? Because I suspect that may occur and greatly skew the result.
I do hope we check to make sure that this was a fair and valid vote, as oddly, FR suddenly has doubled in size, in the span of five minutes flat. And while it might be possible, I find it highly improbable that such an event could occur within the span of just moments..
Please, Please make sure the vote is fair and valid...
I know for a fact that there's multi-voting now from watching the logged in user listing. The last 8-10 votes for Forgotten Realms have been names belonging to the same person...
If people are cheating, then perhaps you should make this a different poll if multiple usernames of the same person are going to be used. Why not an e-mail vote? Get everyone to set their head and pick from the choices and then count the emails because, the names will all be registered to certain emails and that will make it fairer, won't it?
Yes, I have means of seeing if someone is throwing the vote, and as such please do not take the numbers literally. While I cannot remove the votes, when the poll closes I will do an audit. I won't release more details on that for security reasons.
I'm not overly worried about people voting twice, as I figure that will even out in the end. Most everyone has more than one name and I'd be shocked if everyone stuck to voting with just one of them. Some people may use two names to vote for two different settings.
I am concerned about people voting in such an extreme manner that it throws the vote, and that is what I'll be checking for. Either way, when all is said in done I'll know who voted, for what and how many times each. Then I can weigh how strict I want or need to be to make it a fair vote.
Bottom line, rest assured there will be an audit.
Otherwise, I can edit the poll so that it shows who voted for what. It's an option, but one I'm hesitant to use for various reasons.
P.S. I'm sure e-mails would be just as guilty of being duped. At least I have multiple means of confirming abuse via the boards.
I am concerned about people voting in such an extreme manner that it throws the vote, and that is what I'll be checking for. Either way, when all is said in done I'll know who voted, for what and how many times each. Then I can weigh how strict I want or need to be to make it a fair vote.
Thank you for that reassurance
*throws her lot in with Sigil* Go City of Doors! :cheer:
-Draggy
I'm not overly worried about people voting twice, as I figure that will even out in the end. Most everyone has more than one name and I'd be shocked if everyone stuck to voting with just one of them. Some people may use two names to vote for two different settings.
That seems to show a bit of a lack of trust in the majority of patrons, most of which I think are mature enough to only vote once in a given poll. I personally have 5 active board names (and many more inactive ones), but will only vote with this one, and why should those of us who follow the rules be placed in a situation where we have less say in this decision than those who choose to act unfairly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by WizO_Adele
I am concerned about people voting in such an extreme manner that it throws the vote, and that is what I'll be checking for. Either way, when all is said in done I'll know who voted, for what and how many times each. Then I can weigh how strict I want or need to be to make it a fair vote.
I don't think there is any reason to provide any leeway for multiple voter names. As mentioned above, it only serves to discourage those of us who choose to adhere to the spirit of the rules of a vote by giving us less say than others. A majority created by one person under multiple identities is hardly a majority. One IP address should mean one vote, or for those with dynamic/dial-up IPs, one email should mean one vote.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WizO_Adele
Bottom line, rest assured there will be an audit.
As there should be, as the guilty party mentioned above has admitted to it to some he knows when confronted about it.
Even if Forgotten Realms manages to win fairly, I'm sure I won't be the only person who doubts the validity of the result if any individual is allowed to possess multiple votes. The poll has been compromised, and even a slight leniency will only compromise it further.
I'm glad to see that attention is being given to this issue, I only hope that the vote is restored to a fair situation.
Any vote is going to be compromised and contain some flaws, irregardless of the medium. What we have here is the best option of the bunch that provides me the most control in ascertaining abuse and controlling it. I don't think it shows a lack of trust on my part to be wary. I would love to think that everyone will be 100% honest, but it's my responsibility as the ISRP lead to make certain that is proven to be true. It's about taking precaution and being responsible. I'm not trying to accuse anyone.
Certainly I'm not going to lose sleep over people voting twice. While the intention is for everyone to vote once I suspect that when I tally up who has voted twice and what they voted for I will find that they have evened each other out. That was my point, they'll be a wash. And if they have not, then that will be taken into account by the audit. I'll post final tallies of each option once I've removed *any* duplicate votes.
Tharivarious, I'm not entirely sure how you think I can make the vote more fair? I've already stated I'm going to remove any duplicate votes. Software-wise I am unable to physically do so, but when the poll is closed I can audit the results and post the final adjusted scores. I do hesitate to allow the who voted for what to be viewed by everyone, because that just opens up public debate and questioning of every screenname as well as making it public what everyone wants. I know I don't want my choice public, for many reasons.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
