Posts from Voting for the location of the CIS-2107 tournament.

Thank you, my general, for remembering me)
I haven't been here since June, but I felt like checking in and seeing what's happening with the CIS. I realized that hockey in Kyiv isn't exciting anyone this year, which was a bit disappointing.
The CIS, judging by the geography, is still a formal name, but, as last year, I have nothing against it if you like it, as long as it brings you joy. There are so many ambitions in this topic that I would suggest renaming the tournament to MerlinCup)))
Well, that's just a thought, but seriously, I don't see Vigo as an organizer (no personal offense, just an observation based on past experience). There's a lot of text about voting for a city, but it's better to vote for the organizers in that city. If you don't take this into account, the aftermath of the tournament will seem like paradise to you.

Petya, you're very reasonable – respect.

Judging by the geography, CIS is still a formal name.

At our scientific conferences, if one person from Belarus or Kazakhstan speaks, it automatically acquires the status of an international event. Question: how many representatives from Ukraine are needed for the CIS-2017 tournament to confirm its status?

Renaming the tournament to "Open Championship of Russia" won't make it any better or worse. And I've been saying from the start that the voting should primarily be for the organizer, not the city; in this case, Petya is right.

...A lot of text about voting for a city, but it's better to vote for an organ in the city....

+

out of stock

Many people are asking backstage why a banquet for 2500 is planned in Volgograd, what is it for, and everything is already so expensive...
So, for those who don't understand, watch the following videos, and I think the questions should disappear...
Well, and for those who were there, I suggest simply immersing yourself in the festive atmosphere once again...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96-3h7wY4Cw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FcjEeGzzNQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aighQqKY2sM

Have a great DAY everyone!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3s_tMFNXYnQ

!!!

j-sh-shift through "I"

zh-sh-pereshi through "I"

And immediately drank it. (c) "Moscow-Petushki"

You can even come to Volgograd if you pass your exams successfully, but Yekaterinburg is a completely different story.

What difference does it make to you where to go? Get to Moscow, and we'll take you to your destination, whether you're alive or not.

abc

Actually, I don't know why I thought the tournament was being held in the first week of May. It just doesn't work out for me, sorry for the irrelevant comment.

Yesterday, Dirty and I discussed the voting algorithm. So, I'll share what I came up with. And let's not start another argument – we've already had three in different threads this week, which is more than we had in the past six months on the entire forum. 1. We've slightly modified the Scorpa system. Here's how it works: - Didn't participate in any CIS tournaments – 1 point. - Participated in 1 CIS tournament – 2 points. - Participated in 2 CIS tournaments – 3 points. - Participated in 3 or more CIS tournaments – 4 points. (I would also suggest awarding an extra point to those who attended all 7 CIS tournaments of the New Era – there are only a couple of them: Cobra, Napalm, Preds, and Bayazet?) 2. Dirty insists on the possibility of multi-voting. However, if a person wants to vote for one city, they have, say, 4 votes. But if the same person votes for two cities, they then have 4 + 4 votes, which creates an imbalance. Therefore, I propose that each person has a set number of points. If a person votes for one city, they spend all their points on it. If they vote for two, their points are divided equally between them. 3. The criterion for winning a bid. We have three candidates. And if the votes are distributed roughly equally (34%-33%-33%), then 34% becomes the winning criterion. In my opinion, this isn't ideal because the argument will likely continue after such a result (since 34% is, to put it mildly, a little less than 66%). Therefore, in this case, I don't see anything better than the Presidential election system. The winning criterion should be more than 50% of all votes, either in the first round or the second (where the candidates with the most votes in the first round proceed). The only weak point here is the possibility of a tie. In this case, the votes of the CIS tournament champions from previous years should be decisive. If you like, a quick poll can be conducted among them in controversial situations. There are exactly 7 of them (Stinger has two votes).

I support Merlin's voting system for the first round.

For now, I'm thinking like this:
Weight of votes:
Didn't participate - 0.5
Participated once - 1
Participated twice - 1.5
Participated 3+ times - 2

Regarding the format, I absolutely don't see the point in holding it in 2 rounds. We don't have 10+ options. It will only prolong the process. IMHO.

I'm not sure if a multiple-choice option is needed. I think it is. If a person wants to participate and 2nd place is equally acceptable, why should they have to choose?

In short, I'm waiting for reasonable suggestions. What does everyone think?

+Koste. I just don't understand, since when does a vote get divided into parts when multiple options are selected? Against having multiple rounds.