Top 25 peaks for 25 years periods - voting panel thread

[Sign5]

I'll play, sure.

[70sFan]

In. Are we starting from the oldest or newest era first?

I thought about starting the newest era first, just to do it at the same time with Ben Taylor list. I see the first big disagreement between my and his list, so it would be nice to compare them.

Of course doing the old one first also makes sense.

Re: ABA
Think it should go in the first era with the NBA seasons. And agree with penbeast about stretching it to include 1976 - having a single ABA year in the second era kind of sticks out like a sore thumb. Granted it breaks the 25 theme, pre / post merger / 21st century is still a pretty nice grouping.

I think we can do that, 1976 is quite odd moment to start a new era, while 1977 suits perfectly.

Re: Vote format
Like 2 players a round to speed things up. However, I would strongly advise against a point tally system with five nominees. Five people voting A>B can be offset by a single B stan leaving A off their vote. Some form of H2H comparison (like Kemeny) would safeguard against this manipulation.

OK, I will take a closer look to the alternatives.

[70sFan]

1. I like the idea of a top 9 in 9 ABA seasons. It's tough to compare a league that isn't the same. But I don't have too strong an opinion on this.

I thought ABA-only would give us the opportunity to discuss more lesser known guys, but it seems that most people prefers just adding it to the first era and I am fine with that.

2. Just use the same format as the last peaks projects. Don't see a need to change it.

That would make the project too long, we need 2 spots in one thread in my opinion.

3. As I've said before, I would say to only allow people who have 500 posts and been a part of RealGM for at least 2 years to vote. Newer posters can still post in the threads and then can be included in future projects. This might sound restrictive but so far everyone who posted in this thread is eligible to participate.

I think 2 years is a bit too restrictive, but I can use the one year threshold if people approve it. I just don't want another project being manipulated, otherwise I want as much fresh blood as possible.

[trelos6]

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.

I’m happy to participate.

[lessthanjake]

I’m interested

[Joao Saraiva]

I am interested as long as we can vote for LeBron in previous eras and go on discord groups for the reasons why.

JK yes I'm interested, if I could be added to the voters I'd be happy with that.

[iggymcfrack]

In. Are we starting from the oldest or newest era first?

I thought about starting the newest era first, just to do it at the same time with Ben Taylor list. I see the first big disagreement between my and his list, so it would be nice to compare them.

Of course doing the old one first also makes sense.

Re: ABA
Think it should go in the first era with the NBA seasons. And agree with penbeast about stretching it to include 1976 - having a single ABA year in the second era kind of sticks out like a sore thumb. Granted it breaks the 25 theme, pre / post merger / 21st century is still a pretty nice grouping.

I think we can do that, 1976 is quite odd moment to start a new era, while 1977 suits perfectly.

Re: Vote format
Like 2 players a round to speed things up. However, I would strongly advise against a point tally system with five nominees. Five people voting A>B can be offset by a single B stan leaving A off their vote. Some form of H2H comparison (like Kemeny) would safeguard against this manipulation.

OK, I will take a closer look to the alternatives.

I very much like the idea of doing the new era first if it’s going to be a long project. Having our voting mirror what’s happening on such a current and public topic will only make our discussion better as I’m sure we’ll get ideas while listening to episodes and such.

Also, very much like the idea of ending the first era with the end of the ABA and comparing the ABA and NBA peaks side-by-side instead of separately.

[f4p]

I don’t think I’ve got it in me for the whole project but I’ll probably post in the threads. I was iffy on the last project before the scandal but now I realize I probably wasn’t fully invested, especially as I realize the voting will probably be signicficantly different than what I would like.

But I would probably suggest the new era first as well.

[rk2023]

I have been away from the board due to bandwidth and personal reasons, but I would love to participate in this project

[Verticality]

This is an interesting format. I hope there are less controversies.

[homecourtloss]

Interested for sure.

[Djoker]

1. I like the idea of a top 9 in 9 ABA seasons. It's tough to compare a league that isn't the same. But I don't have too strong an opinion on this.

I thought ABA-only would give us the opportunity to discuss more lesser known guys, but it seems that most people prefers just adding it to the first era and I am fine with that.

2. Just use the same format as the last peaks projects. Don't see a need to change it.

That would make the project too long, we need 2 spots in one thread in my opinion.

3. As I've said before, I would say to only allow people who have 500 posts and been a part of RealGM for at least 2 years to vote. Newer posters can still post in the threads and then can be included in future projects. This might sound restrictive but so far everyone who posted in this thread is eligible to participate.

I think 2 years is a bit too restrictive, but I can use the one year threshold if people approve it. I just don't want another project being manipulated, otherwise I want as much fresh blood as possible.

Too long is not an issue I think. It's the offseason and we don't have to finish it in the next 2 months. It can resume next summer or even continue during the season but at a reduced pace.

As for 2 years on the forum, I really think we should enforce that. So far everyone who responded in the thread that they are interested to participate meet that requirement so it's not like we're cutting down a lot of people. And besides it's better to be a bit restrictive IMO than risk the project getting derailed. Not to mention people without official votes can post in the threads and make contributions. Just my two cents.

[Elpolo_14]

If it allows

I would like to participate

[Clyde Frazier]

I do like this idea of a format change and think it could provide some great discussion. I'm interested in participating, thanks!

[babyjax13]

I am interested! I will probably only vote for the last 25 years, though, and lurk for the other periods : )

[lessthanjake]

1. I like the idea of a top 9 in 9 ABA seasons. It's tough to compare a league that isn't the same. But I don't have too strong an opinion on this.

I thought ABA-only would give us the opportunity to discuss more lesser known guys, but it seems that most people prefers just adding it to the first era and I am fine with that.

2. Just use the same format as the last peaks projects. Don't see a need to change it.

That would make the project too long, we need 2 spots in one thread in my opinion.

3. As I've said before, I would say to only allow people who have 500 posts and been a part of RealGM for at least 2 years to vote. Newer posters can still post in the threads and then can be included in future projects. This might sound restrictive but so far everyone who posted in this thread is eligible to participate.

I think 2 years is a bit too restrictive, but I can use the one year threshold if people approve it. I just don't want another project being manipulated, otherwise I want as much fresh blood as possible.

Too long is not an issue I think. It's the offseason and we don't have to finish it in the next 2 months. It can resume next summer or even continue during the season but at a reduced pace.

As for 2 years on the forum, I really think we should enforce that. So far everyone who responded in the thread that they are interested to participate meet that requirement so it's not like we're cutting down a lot of people. And besides it's better to be a bit restrictive IMO than risk the project getting derailed. Not to mention people without official votes can post in the threads and make contributions. Just my two cents.

I think the bolded is an important point. Not being given a formal vote really does not mean that someone cannot participate in the discussion. It just means that their views aren’t included in a tally at the end. I participated a lot in discussions in the more recent Retro POY, but never actually requested to be able to vote. It was still fun to participate in the discussions, and I don’t think I would have had more fun with it if I’d had a vote (which is a big reason why I never bothered to request being able to vote despite clearly qualifying to do so).

So yeah, while I don’t really have particularly strong views on what (if any) entry requirements there should be for voting in the project, I do want to just note that having entry requirements for voting does not gatekeep anyone from being involved in discussions. Most of us have been involved in discussions in projects we didn’t vote in.

[Top10alltime]

I'd like to participate!

[TheGOATRises007]

Interested to participate as much as I can.

[70sFan]

Ok guys, so far we have 20 posters that showed the interest to participate in the project:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

We also have these posters who have not meet the criteria of one year account existence:

.

.

.

I wonder what the old guard thinks about the 3 posters above. I am undecided on the criteria right now.


Now, about voting criteria: I have read about the Kemeny method and I think it is a good way to make it work. I think 4 votes for 2 places in the ranking for each thread is the best way to make it work. Do you agree?

[tsherkin]

We also have these posters who have not meet the criteria of one year account existence:

.

.

.

I wonder what the old guard thinks about the 3 posters above. I am undecided on the criteria right now.

I'm good with them. They seem to post well enough and I'm all for generating good discussion.