Voting for the location of the CIS-2107 tournament.

Dirty_Player

9 years ago

Auto-translated

MerlinTheMagician

Therefore, I suggest the following: each person has their own set of points. If a person votes for one town, they spend all their points on it. If they vote for two, their points are divided equally between them.

That makes sense.

In reply to Dirty_Player

MerlinTheMagician

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

I don't know if multiple choices are necessary. I think they are. If a person wants to arrive and 2nd place is equally good, why should they have to choose?

In short, I'm waiting for reasonable ideas. What does anyone suggest?

Firstly, the numbers are exactly the same for me (I just multiplied each by two to make it easier to calculate later).
Secondly, a person has a vote worth n points. They can distribute these n points either to one application or divide them between two. Otherwise, they would have 2n points and gain an advantage over those who vote for only one city. In this case, the algorithm itself would contain an error – those who vote for two cities would have a greater influence on the voting than those who vote for one, which means unequal conditions for each participant in the voting.

In reply to Dirty_Player

Alexxl

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

I'm currently thinking along these lines:
Vote weight:
Never participated - 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?

Multiple Choice - definitely against it. If someone has an opinion, it should be formed in some way, not like "I'm for these and these, but against these..."
I like Merlin's point system more because I think those who actually participate should be the ones deciding. Newcomers are good, but in reality, there aren't many of them, and those who want to will come to Moscow, Yekaterinburg, and Volgograd.
I can't say anything about the rounds; I haven't formed a clear opinion for myself.

In reply to Alexxl

Dirty_Player

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Alexxl

Multiple Choice - definitely against it. If someone has an opinion, it should be formed in some way, and not like this: I'm for those and those, but against these...))

Well, if a person is equally willing to go to point A and point B, but not willing to go to point C, why can't they indicate this in the vote?

Added 1 minute ago

MerlinTheMagician

and those who vote for two cities have a greater influence on the vote than those who vote for one, which means - unequal conditions for each participant in the vote.

In reality, those who vote for 2 cities are actually voting against the third. And if they vote for 3, it's the same as not voting at all.

In reply to Dirty_Player

Alexxl

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

Well, if a person is equally willing to go to point A and point B, but not to point C, why can't they indicate this in the vote?

Added 1 minute ago

In fact, those who vote for 2 cities are essentially voting against the third. And if they vote for 3, it's the same as not voting at all.

Well, if the option for multiple choices is really needed, then Merlin's option could work, i.e., a person can distribute the sum of their points between two cities, instead of giving a full vote to each, which would give the person two votes.
And, as another option, someone already mentioned it, not to count the votes of local residents.

In reply to Alexxl

MerlinTheMagician

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Yes, of course, when counting votes, those who have never participated should meet the following criterion: at least 1 year of registration on the forum.

And one more point. After the voting begins, a period of silence should start. All topics with discussions and applications, in my opinion, should be closed to new posts. The organizers had more than enough time to provide all the information they considered important.

In reply to MerlinTheMagician

Dirty_Player

9 years ago

Auto-translated

That's settled. Now we just need to decide on the number of rounds. We need opinions. I'm leaning towards 1 round.

In reply to MerlinTheMagician

caliban

9 years ago

Auto-translated

MerlinTheMagician

Yes, of course, when counting votes, those who have never attended should meet the criterion: at least 1 year of registration on the forum.

I am against this point. Isn't this a gathering of old friends?

Added 1 minute ago

Alexxl

Well, if the ability to choose multiple options is really needed, then Merlin's option would work, i.e., a person can distribute their total points between two cities, instead of giving a full vote to one and then another... This would give the person two votes.
And, as another option, someone already mentioned it, we shouldn't count the votes of local residents.

I agree, if someone is willing to go to both places, their vote should be split. And regarding the votes of local residents, I believe they should be counted.

In reply to Dirty_Player

MerlinTheMagician

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

I'm leaning towards round 1.

I've already written about it. I'll repeat my opinion. The victory criterion is too weak. On the other hand, it's already been dragged out as much as possible...
Ideally, the winner should be announced on Monday, and they should travel and sign the guarantee agreement with the base on Tuesday.
So, let's actually have round 1. There's no time. Tickets are getting more expensive.

In reply to caliban

Alexxl

9 years ago

Auto-translated

caliban

I am against this point. Isn't this supposed to be a gathering of old friends?

Added 1 minute ago

I agree, if someone is willing to go to both places, their vote should be split. And regarding the votes of local residents, I believe they should be taken into account.

I might reveal a secret to you, but this is actually a gathering of old friends with the addition of new, reasonable people.

In reply to Alexxl

caliban

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Alexxl

Let me let you in on a secret, but it's really a gathering of old friends with the addition of new, decent guys)))

I wanted to say that it's not just a gathering of old friends; that would be more accurate.

In reply to caliban

MerlinTheMagician

9 years ago

Auto-translated

caliban

I am against this point. Isn't this a gathering of old friends?

Including a gathering...
In exceptional cases – under the personal responsibility of the judges from previous championships – Vika and Dirty, let them take into account the votes of those they consider not to be "technical voters".
But a registration period of at least one year protects us from the possibility of artificially influencing the result.

In reply to caliban

St_Klaus

9 years ago

Auto-translated

caliban

I am against this point. Isn't this a gathering of old friends?

I agree. If a person regularly participates in tournaments and shows interest in the development of the Heroes community, but has only been registered for eleven and a half months, why can't they come? Even if it's 6 months? What's the logic?

iDD

I support Merlin's voting system.

I'm ready to support anything, let's vote soon, otherwise we need to buy tickets to Korolev :smile09:

In reply to Dirty_Player

Wicc

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Why should a vote in a multiple-choice poll be split? The task is to determine how many people are willing to come to the tournament. This is a simple sum of the "yes" votes. For example, if 3 people participate in the poll, 2 of them are willing to come to both King's Bounty and Volgograd, and 1 person is willing to come only to Yekaterinburg. If the votes are divided, each city will get 1 point, but in reality, the quorum in Yekaterinburg will be twice as low. Regarding the weight of votes, this isn't just a casual gathering; it's primarily a tournament. Therefore, the votes of those who plan to participate in the tournament should have a higher weight than the votes of spectators. I don't understand the point of organizing a meetup for poker players and casual gamers. The number of previously visited CIS countries is a strange criterion. For a tournament, there are two prestige parameters: the number of participants and the number of experienced players. The former is more important. These criteria can be evaluated in different ways, but certainly not based on the number of previously visited CIS countries. More precisely, the connection here can only be based on the criterion of "whether they have been there at least once," i.e., whether they have had the experience or not. It's not very reliable, but there is at least some correlation.