Empress of Xpanded - (Discussion on Voting-Rules)

^^ Will you be standing in for Rachel Riley on Countdown if she has to go on maternity leave again.

Nah she doesn't talk absolute shite like I do .
I am the World champion of inane rubbish .

(27-11-2022 17:49 )Snooks Wrote:  Ah. I was not expecting you to run with an offset formula but now that you have I feel duty bound to post what would happen if using my formula whereby the results are very different. I have taken the time to give a FULL breakdown.
The rewards increase in terms of points gained by each babe as the nomination lists grow closer to 8.
The intention is to prevent few babes claiming a share of the total points available that is not in line with what they would receive in the event that a full list of 8 names is submitted.
This is only my idea btw and could be a complete load of old bollocks as so much of my thinking often is laugh.

So with the eight babes there are 8 ranking positions in play.
A total of 36 points are allocated across the 8 positions.
With a full right name list the breakdown would be as follows with the percentage figures to be applied below to an alternative length list.
22.22% (rounded down) i.e 8 out of 36 go to 1st place
19.44% (rounded down) i.e 7 out of 36 go to 2nd place.
16.66% (rounded up) i.e 6 out of 36 go to 3rd place
13.89% (rounded up) I e 5 out of 36 go to 4th place
11.11% (rounded down) i.e 4 out of 36 go to 5th place
8.33% (rounded down) i.e 3 out of 36 go to 6th place
5.55% i.e 2 out of 36 go to 7th place
2.78% I e 1 out of 36 go to 8th place

Now lets say someone only nominates 1 babe rather than 8. This means only 8 points are allocatable because the remaining 28 of the original 36 are not in play. So the chosen babe will receive 22.22% of those 8 points which equates to 1.78 points (rounded up)

Lets say somebody submits a top 2 rather than a top 8.
This means that 15 points can be allocated as the remaining 21 points are not in play.
1st place would receive 22.22% of 15 points = 3.33 pts (rounded up)
2nd place would receive 19.44% of 15 points = 2.92 points (rounded up)

Top 3 nominated.
This means 21 points can be allocated as the remaining 15 are not in play.
1st place would receive 22.22% of 21 points = 4.67 pts (rounded up)
2nd place would receive 19.44% of 21 points = 4.08 pts (rounded down)
3rd place would receive 16.66% of 21 points = 3.5 pts (rounded up)

Top 4 nominated.
This means 26 points can be allocated as the remaining 10 are not in play.
1st place would receive 22.22% of 26 points = 5.78 pts (rounded up)
2nd place would receive 19.44% of 26 points = 5.05 pts (rounded down)
3rd place would receive 16.66% of 26 points = 4.33 pts (rounded down)
4th place would receive 13.89% of 26 points = 3.61 pts (rounded down)

Top 5 nominated
This means 30 points can be allocated as the remaining 6 are not in play.
1st place would receive 22.22% of 30 points = 6.67 pts (rounded up)
2nd place would receive 19.44% of 30 points = 5.83 pts (rounded down)
3rd place would receive 16.66% of 30 points = 5 pts (rounded up)
4th place would receive 13.89% of 30 points = 4.17 pts (rounded up)
5th place would receive 11.11% of 30 points = 3.33 pts

Top 6 nominated
This means 33 points can be allocated as the remaining 3 are not in play.
1st place would receive 22.22% of 33 points = 7.33 pts (rounded down)
2nd place would receive 19.44% of 33 points = 6.42 pts (rounded up)
3rd place would receive 16.66% of 33 points = 5.5 pts (rounded up)
4th place would receive 13.89% of 33 points = 4.58 pts (rounded down)
5th place would receive 11.11%% of 33 points = 3.67 pts (rounded up)
6th place would receive 8.33% of 33 points = 2.75 pts (rounded down)

Top 7 nominated
This means 35 points can be allocated as the remaining 1 is not in play.
1st place would receive 22.22% of 35 points = 7.78pts (rounded up)
2nd place would receive 19.44% of 35 points = 6.8 pts (rounded down)
3rd place would receive 16.66% of 35 points = 5.83 pts (rounded down)
4th place would receive 13.89% of 35 points = 4.86 pts (rounded down)
5th place would receive 11.11%% of 35 points = 3.89 pts (rounded up)
6th place would receive 8.33% of 35 points = 2.92 pts (rounded up)
7th place would receive 5.55% of 35 points = 1.94 pts (rounded down)

The logic of your formula makes sense. But, I made my arbitrary rule change based on balancing that risk of vote swamping (as I term it) with voters' right to value their support for particular nominees above others where the motivation is unwavering valuation of their nominee's merits above all others, which in many cases is perfectly valid. Notice I've tweaked the new rules since I first posted them!

Yeah that's absolutely fine.
I was merely just putting the idea out there.
There is no definitively correct solution tbh . Now you see why I don't run comps anymore .

1. Honey
2. Elise
3.Michelle
4. Ashton
5. Vicki
6. Maria
7. Poppi
8. Lola

(27-11-2022 19:48 )Tickler Wrote:  1. Honey
2. Elise
3.Michelle
4. Ashton
5. Vicki
6. Maria
7. Poppi
8. Lola

Sorry wrong place…

(27-11-2022 18:10 )Snooks Wrote:  Yeah that's absolutely fine.
I was merely just putting the idea out there.
There is no definitively correct solution tbh . Now you see why I don't run comps anymore .

You are running a comp. WCPL

(27-11-2022 20:04 )Boomerangutangangbang Wrote:  

(27-11-2022 18:10 )Snooks Wrote:  Yeah that's absolutely fine.
I was merely just putting the idea out there.
There is no definitively correct solution tbh . Now you see why I don't run comps anymore .

You are running a comp. WCPL

Yeah I meant voting comps .
Running the WCPL is a cakewalk compared to babe comps

(26-11-2022 22:27 )Regenerated Wrote:  Including my own. I stand by that decision as I don't wish to list more votes just for the sake of naming names. I've followed the same process in another babe voting competition.
The current system for this particular competition is fine.

I think the idea that you could oblige people to vote for 8, in order to be counted, wouldn't work.

People who vote for less than 8 will have an effect, but that's just the way it is. From the counters' POV it makes life mathematically easier.

It's like that thing where they allotted F1 points to Wacky Races to determine the overall winner.

Apologies to Harry_da_Monk for petulantly removing his rep (which I restored back after) in my misguided, frankly stupid auto-reflex denial that there was anything flawed with the ranking-system rules I set for this year’s Empress of Xpanded 2022 vote. He said the scoring system was flawed and he was right despite me initially admonishing him for thinking he was wrong. So thanks to Harry for opening my eyes to it. My tweak of the rules means it lessens the impact of that slight flaw in the ranked points system. I hope it neatly tucks in a leveller on the impact of any statistical aberration from the tactical voting tendency to exploit the ranked voting system