Scratch

funkymonkey wrote:

wow, mr_x was in first place a couple hours ago and now it is illusionist!

Still 1 week to go... 

So... Should we use Schulze and Borda Count?

The-Whiz wrote:

So... Should we use Schulze and Borda Count?

I guess so...

The-Whiz wrote:

So... Should we use Schulze and Borda Count?

Yesh.

OK, Schulze and Borda Count it is, then.

Last edited by The-Whiz (2010-02-09 22:26:32)

Yay I'm in twelfth place. XD

Since you guys settled on analyzing via Schulze and Borda Count, I thought I might post this just to give a more clearer explanation between Schulze and Borda Count methods:

Let's assume there are only three candidates (A, B, and C) and that there are five votes in total. Lets then assume that that the five votes go like this:

Vote 1: C A B
Vote 2: C B A
Vote 3: C A B
Vote 4: B A C
Vote 5: C B A

Schulze will automatically say that C is the winner, B the second runner up, and A the loser. This is because many of the votes show preference to C, and B has higher preference than A (notice how B has a first preference in vote 4, and how A seems to achieve only second and third preferences).

In Borda Count preference, lets assume a first position is assigned 5 points, second is four points, and third position is three points. The first vote would then assign 5 points to C (who was first preference), 4 to A, and then 3 to B. The second vote would assign 5 points to c, 4 points to B, and then 3 points to A.

Based on the five votes, the point counts are as follows:
A = 4 + 3 + 4 + 4 + 3 = 18
B = 3 + 4 + 3 + 5 + 3 = 18
C = 5 + 5 + 5 + 3 + 5 = 23

Now look. C is a winner, but A and B have the same ranking. Borda Count shows no distinction between candidates B and A.

Hopefully this explains it. The exact nature to how Schulze and Borda Count work are a bit more complicated than what I have mentioned. I hope statisticians will not cringe at my explanation. ^^;

[EDIT]: fixed a typo. 

Last edited by cheddargirl (2010-02-09 22:38:36)

cheddargirl wrote:

Since you guys settled on analyzing via Schulze and Borda Count, I thought I might post this just to give a more clearer explanation between Schulze and Borda Count methods:

Let's assume there are only three candidates (A, B, and C) and that there are five votes in total. Lets then assume that that the five votes go like this:

Vote 1: C A B
Vote 2: C B A
Vote 3: C A B
Vote 4: B A C
Vote 5: C B A

Schulze will automatically say that C is the winner, B the second runner up, and A the loser. This is because many of the votes show preference to C, and B has higher preference than A (notice how B has a first preference in vote 4, and how A seems to achieve only second and third preferences).

In Borda Count preference, lets assume a first position is assigned 5 points, second is four points, and third position is three points. The first vote would then assign 5 points to C (who was first preference), 4 to A, and then 3 to B. The second vote would assign 5 points to c, 4 points to B, and then 3 points to A.

Based on the five votes, the point counts are as follows:
A = 4 + 3 + 4 + 4 + 3 = 18
B = 3 + 4 + 3 + 5 + 3 = 18
C = 5 + 5 + 5 + 3 + 5 = 23

Now look. C is a winner, but A and B have the same ranking. Borda Count shows no distinction between candidates B and C.

Hopefully this explains it. Schulze is slighly a bit more complicated than what I have mentioned. I hope statisticians will not cringe at my explanation. ^^;

Made a correction, you said C would be the loser and winner 

adriangl wrote:

Made a correction, you said C would be the loser and winner 

Fixed it. I hate typos. 

cheddargirl wrote:

adriangl wrote:

Made a correction, you said C would be the loser and winner 

Fixed it. I hate typos. 

Yes! The user finally correct the moderator  !

ScratchX wrote:

OMG xD
I just logged on today and voted!
xD Im so happy im number 4! 

Btw, I voted for you guys Steppenwulf and illusionist! 

I put you as... third or fourth. I think XD


Like so...

1) Chrischb
2) Illusionist
3) ScratchX
4) adriangl

Hey, I remember! lol

I voted...