Pablo Novi wrote:I've got a question (essentially the same one as a few threads ago).
For people (like myself) who have already voted in a thread BUT whose vote has clearly no chance of winning; is it "ethical" under our system to late-change such a vote to one of the seriously contending candidates?
IF SO, I'd change my Cousy (Vote) and Baylor (Alt) TO: Mikan (vote), no (Alt).
The more general question: SHOULD our system here allow (even encourage) people to late-switch their votes based on viable-candidate issues?
As I'd stated previously, I don't have a problem with you voting for someone other than your genuine top preferred pick (if your top preferred pick doesn't have any other support or traction).
However, I'm going to ask that you not change your vote in this manner. "This manner" I'm referring to is: at the 11th hour (with potentially only minutes remaining on this thread), and leap-frogging Mikan (who is one of the top vote recipients in what appears a VERY close race) over both your primary and alternate picks........It just doesn't look good, and is certainly a manner in which people could manipulate the results.
I'm not saying manipulation is your intent, but I need to set precedent. If I allow you to change your vote literally at the last minute like this (and in such a close race), I'm on shaking ground for denying anyone else that right later on (which could open the flood-gates to a whole bunch of strategic manipulation).
I realize you might ask "how can I know if my candidate has traction UNLESS I wait till near the end?" But one can largely tell who has traction and who doesn't based on previous threads.
I know this is still a bit of a grey area, but hopefully that helps clear it up. I'd prefer we leave your votes as is for now, but don't have a problem with you being a somewhat more "strategic" in who you vote for in the next thread. You can always campaign hard for your preferred pick while not casting a vote for him, too.
post #43 (25 votes, requiring 13 for true majority):
). 
