ENnie Nominations!

[FFG Greg]

To Greg: Respectfully, it depends on what your definition of "fair" is when you say one person one vote is the foundation of all fair voting mechanisms. Weighted voting systems have a long and happy history and are certainly fair if you're trying to get a statistical sampling of the "middle" rather than the fringes and if you're trying to give voice to the minority as well as the majority.

Weighted, sure. Approval voting, for example, is a good way to protect the interests of the minority. Note, however, that even in this kind of system, the principle behind "one person one vote" is protected. In the standard approval voting system, for example, voters can vote for as many candidates as they like, but they can only give a candidate a single vote. In other systems, the voter might rank candidates but the rankings are fixed (each voter gets a 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1, for example). Alternatively, the voter may get a certain number of votes and be able to distribute them however he likes among the candidates -- but his vote pool is still fixed and it's the same as everyone else's.

This system, on the other hand, effectively allows the voter to expand his vote pool disproportionately to other voters simply by gaming the system. Respectfully, it is a really poor system, regardless of your particular definition of fairness.

There already seem to be conflicting opinions on what the guidelines are. Is 10-0-0-0-0 a bogus vote that will be thrown out, or is it a legitimate expression of the voter's preference that we shouldn't second guess?

Greg
FFG

 

[Twin Rose]

I think that we have a much fairer system this year, and the results will reflect quality more than distrbution channels.

I think it would be very responsible for the publishers involved to be sure and ask their customers to rate products fairly. If you simply don't know, choose the 'don't know' option.

 

[Dextra]

Hey Morrus!

So I take it last year's winners will receive no trophy?
--Erik

Maybe the EN peeps will be so kind as to make extra trophies for last years' winners.
Hell, I'll pay for one, just give!
My kids were promised a trophy, and they never got one. I'd hate to think that ENWorld made my little girls cry.

(gee, overprotective momma?)

 

[FFG Greg]

Example: results will look like this after tabulation and cleansing:

[snip]

So Product D, while perhaps only 3rd in the regognition/familiarity ( not "popular" ) vote, wins with a superior average rating.

Wow. So number of votes doesn't matter at all -- it's all about the average score?

So the winner of this popular award could, in principle, have received one vote of 10 (from its publisher, say), with every other voter abstaining? This would count as a "perfect score" and beat out the product that got a thousand "10s" and one "9"? I expect I'm misunderstanding this, and I apologize if I'm just being dense here.

In any case, thanks for taking the time to discuss this. Obviously, we wouldn't be here if we didn't care.

Greg
FFG

 

[BigFreekinGoblinoid]

Wow. So number of votes doesn't matter at all -- it's all about the average score?

So the winner of this popular award could, in principle, have received one vote of 10 (from its publisher, say), with every other voter abstaining? This would count as a "perfect score" and beat out the product that got a thousand "10s" and one "9"? I expect I'm misunderstanding this, and I apologize if I'm just being dense here.

In any case, thanks for taking the time to discuss this. Obviously, we wouldn't be here if we didn't care.

Greg
FFG

I'm not involved in the set up or administration of the voting, but yes, this is they way I understand the stated voting process. Your example is VERY extreme though. Yes, some products are much lesser known ( due to distribution, publish date or other factors ) and will receive less votes. As per my example above, it COULD very well be several hundred votes less than another product!

If more people have a read a book in a category (say ... Epic Level Handbook ) than it will receive many more votes than the lesser known and lesser distributed books in that Category. But if every other product in that category is "better" ( as determined by ranking ) than the ELH, but each only gets half as many total votes, then it still deserves a chance to win IMO.

There should probably be a minimum nuber of votes required to win though IMO to avoid situations like your extreme example. See my "confidence level" stats in my previous post.

 

[FFG Greg]

I'm not involved in the set up or administration of the voting, but yes, this is they way I understand the stated voting process. Your example is VERY extreme though.

Yes. So are most of the characters that show up in many smackdown threads. Still, they often demonstrate admirably where the system is broken.

I think there are serious problems with this process that will have a very negative impact on the legitimacy and prestige of the awards, and I hope the system will be reconsidered -- if not this year, then next. I've stated my case and I'll happily bow out of the discussion.

Greg
FFG

 

[alsih2o]

Re: Hey Morrus!

Maybe the EN peeps will be so kind as to make extra trophies for last years' winners.
Hell, I'll pay for one, just give!
My kids were promised a trophy, and they never got one. I'd hate to think that ENWorld made my little girls cry.

(gee, overprotective momma?)

i ammaking this years trophies (see "so you want an ennie" thread) and with morruses kind permission i would be honored to make an extra for the kids

 

[Twin Rose]

Since EN Publishing won't be able to enter and receive anything this year, why don't we present it to them (And the kids!) as a thanks?

 

[alsih2o]

Since EN Publishing won't be able to enter and receive anything this year, why don't we present it to them (And the kids!) as a thanks?

happily. sounds like a worthy cause to me

 

[AaronLoeb]

Weighted, sure. Approval voting, for example, is a good way to protect the interests of the minority. Note, however, that even in this kind of system, the principle behind "one person one vote" is protected. In the standard approval voting system, for example, voters can vote for as many candidates as they like, but they can only give a candidate a single vote. In other systems, the voter might rank candidates but the rankings are fixed (each voter gets a 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1, for example). Alternatively, the voter may get a certain number of votes and be able to distribute them however he likes among the candidates -- but his vote pool is still fixed and it's the same as everyone else's.

This system, on the other hand, effectively allows the voter to expand his vote pool disproportionately to other voters simply by gaming the system. Respectfully, it is a really poor system, regardless of your particular definition of fairness.

Ah! Totally get your point now. Yes, you're totally right. A "fair" weighted system gives everyone equal voting power if not literally one vote.

AJL