RealGM Top 100 All-Time (2017)

[TheGOATRises007]

Also, aside, what do you guys think of a ballot thread where everyone presents their pre-project lists as far as they possibly can? Would be interesting to do a summation of those lists and then compare it to the final project results.

Wouldn't mind.

I think my list will change during/after this project.

[trex_8063]

Also, aside, what do you guys think of a ballot thread where everyone presents their pre-project lists as far as they possibly can? Would be interesting to do a summation of those lists and then compare it to the final project results.

We can probably do this too. Doctor MJ did this prior to the last one (it's linked in the OP here).

[ardee]

Also, aside, what do you guys think of a ballot thread where everyone presents their pre-project lists as far as they possibly can? Would be interesting to do a summation of those lists and then compare it to the final project results.

We can probably do this too. Doctor MJ did this prior to the last one (it's linked in the OP here).

Do you want to make the thread? Or I can if you want too.

[trex_8063]

Also, aside, what do you guys think of a ballot thread where everyone presents their pre-project lists as far as they possibly can? Would be interesting to do a summation of those lists and then compare it to the final project results.

We can probably do this too. Doctor MJ did this prior to the last one (it's linked in the OP here).

Do you want to make the thread? Or I can if you want too.

I'll put either myself or one of the other mods on it.

[Outside]

As an initially non-voting RealGM newbie, I'm not sure if you wanted my input on voting method, but I do prefer the ballot method, mainly because too many people try to game the system by leaving the main competition to their preference off the ballot altogether.

My concern with the ballot method is that having a brief second voting period (24 hours or whatever is decided) for a second round of voting isn't ideal because people who are unavailable during that period will get left out. I think it's been discussed that if you voted for one of the two runoff candidates during the first round that your vote could carry over to the runoff, and I like that.

[Blackmill]

I prefer the ballot.

[THKNKG]

My vote is on the ballot, and I think even a brief sentence or two on the 2nd and 3rd choices would be sufficient. The main point would just be to explain why X is the choice over Y, if their first pick Z didn't get it. And so on...

One consideration of the ballot with points system is that it could lead to people gaming their ballots (ex. If it's close, someone could leave off someone as a 2nd or 3rd choice to help their guy). I don't know if that would happen; just one thing to consider.

[LA Bird]

Personally in favor of single vote system. Reasons being:
1. It's easier to manipulate with a ballot vote by just always leaving a player you don't like completely out of the top 3.
2. Requiring a top 3 ballot would probably increase desertion a lot after top 50 and it is better to have more participation.
3. Quicker to do a writeup on 1 player instead of 3 although this might only be a problem for me since I am a slow writer.

Edit: Seems like I am the only one in favor of the single vote...

[penbeast0]

Knowing that participation dwindles in the later stages, I was hoping to beef up the size of the panel a little more than this, but it is what it is. Perhaps we'll get a few "Johnny come lately's" after the project starts.

Anyway, I wanted to go over an alternate voting protocol than that which is listed in the OP. Just for clarity (since there apparently was some confusion), the protocol in OP is as follows:
Each panel member submits a vote for ONE player. If a player has, at the end of the 48-hour voting window a majority of the total vote (NOT having more votes than any other one player, but an actual majority; that is: >50% of the total vote), he will be awarded the spot. In the event that no player has >50% of the total vote, we would enter a 24-hour run-off vote where panel members will choose between the top two vote recipients. Winner of the run-off is awarded the spot.


But as voting alternatives have been suggested by more than one poster, I'll propose an alternate ballot method, which would be as follows:
Each panel member will state their 1st ballot choice (that is: your top pick), a 2nd ballot choice, and a 3rd ballot choice. Points will be awarded to each ballot choice----I suggest probably a 3-2-1 weighting (3pts for 1st ballot, 2pts for 2nd ballot, 1pt for 3rd ballot), though that is open for debate. The player with the most points at the end of the 48-hour voting window is awarded the spot.
Or we could also discuss and vote upon some stipulations for when the point totals are really close......e.g. perhaps if the top two are separated by 2pts or less, we enter a 24-hour run-off between the top two, or if the player with the most points doesn't have at least .400 (or whatever) "shares", we must enter a run-off between the top two.

We can hash out those latter details later, if necessary. What I want to know from you guys right now is if you would prefer the ballot method instead of the single-vote method in OP.
The more I think about it, the ballot method does seem potentially better.
Advantages:
*Should make "strategic voting" or other attempts to manipulate the vote less effective.
**Probably ends up more fairly reflecting opinions of the panel around certain polarizing players.
***Will likely stimulate more discussion, as there will be more players on the table to discuss.
****Hypothetically it should allow us to get thru the project about a month sooner (by avoiding so many 24-hour run-offs).

Disadvantages:
*Does require a little more time on all our parts, as we now have THREE players to present arguments for instead of just one.


I am paging everyone on the voter panel, as well as those on "trial period" (who presumably/hopefully will be on the panel in due time), to get a feel of what you guys want. So please, everyone take a moment to reply here. Which method would you prefer: single-vote or ballot system?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Strongly disagree that we should use the multiple vote system. Nominations if you like to narrow the possibilities down to 5 at most but the vote for 3 option just begs for manipulation of the vote. Leaving one of the two top players off the ballot or similarly working things is something that would be (a) a potential problem and (b) would be something that would start arguments as people are accused of it -- either accurately or falsely.

[THKNKG]

Strongly disagree that we should use the multiple vote system. Nominations if you like to narrow the possibilities down to 5 at most but the vote for 3 option just begs for manipulation of the vote. Leaving one of the two top players off the ballot or similarly working things is something that would be (a) a potential problem and (b) would be something that would start arguments as people are accused of it -- either accurately or falsely.

I think it could only be an issue with multiple votes if the multiples votes are with a point system. If you assign no points, and just move the votes, there wouldn't be much room for strategic voting. Elgee mentioned what I'm referring to earlier.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[drza]

Spoiler:

Knowing that participation dwindles in the later stages, I was hoping to beef up the size of the panel a little more than this, but it is what it is. Perhaps we'll get a few "Johnny come lately's" after the project starts.

Anyway, I wanted to go over an alternate voting protocol than that which is listed in the OP. Just for clarity (since there apparently was some confusion), the protocol in OP is as follows:
Each panel member submits a vote for ONE player. If a player has, at the end of the 48-hour voting window a majority of the total vote (NOT having more votes than any other one player, but an actual majority; that is: >50% of the total vote), he will be awarded the spot. In the event that no player has >50% of the total vote, we would enter a 24-hour run-off vote where panel members will choose between the top two vote recipients. Winner of the run-off is awarded the spot.


But as voting alternatives have been suggested by more than one poster, I'll propose an alternate ballot method, which would be as follows:
Each panel member will state their 1st ballot choice (that is: your top pick), a 2nd ballot choice, and a 3rd ballot choice. Points will be awarded to each ballot choice----I suggest probably a 3-2-1 weighting (3pts for 1st ballot, 2pts for 2nd ballot, 1pt for 3rd ballot), though that is open for debate. The player with the most points at the end of the 48-hour voting window is awarded the spot.
Or we could also discuss and vote upon some stipulations for when the point totals are really close......e.g. perhaps if the top two are separated by 2pts or less, we enter a 24-hour run-off between the top two, or if the player with the most points doesn't have at least .400 (or whatever) "shares", we must enter a run-off between the top two.

We can hash out those latter details later, if necessary. What I want to know from you guys right now is if you would prefer the ballot method instead of the single-vote method in OP.
The more I think about it, the ballot method does seem potentially better.
Advantages:
*Should make "strategic voting" or other attempts to manipulate the vote less effective.
**Probably ends up more fairly reflecting opinions of the panel around certain polarizing players.
***Will likely stimulate more discussion, as there will be more players on the table to discuss.
****Hypothetically it should allow us to get thru the project about a month sooner (by avoiding so many 24-hour run-offs).

Disadvantages:
*Does require a little more time on all our parts, as we now have THREE players to present arguments for instead of just one.


I am paging everyone on the voter panel, as well as those on "trial period" (who presumably/hopefully will be on the panel in due time), to get a feel of what you guys want. So please, everyone take a moment to reply here. Which method would you prefer: single-vote or ballot system?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Strongly disagree that we should use the multiple vote system. Nominations if you like to narrow the possibilities down to 5 at most but the vote for 3 option just begs for manipulation of the vote. Leaving one of the two top players off the ballot or similarly working things is something that would be (a) a potential problem and (b) would be something that would start arguments as people are accused of it -- either accurately or falsely.

I agree with Penbeast on the downside of the 3-vote ballot. The possibility of people leaving off players that were "competing" with their vote of choice was actually one of the first things I thought of, when I saw that suggested.

[RCM88x]

It doesn't really matter to me, however I would probably be more active if I only needed to do one write up instead of 3.

[ceiling raiser]

voting meta-discussion

trex - How do you feel about employing a ranked choice voting (RCV) system? Could largely eliminate a lot of the strategic voting, gaming the system or runoff chaos if we employ a tactic. Way it works:

(1) Posters list their choices for a spot (3 probably works here so the ballot doesn't take too much time) ranked in order.
(2a) If a candidate reaches 50%+1, voting ends.
(2b) If no candidate reaches 50%+1, then the candidate(s) with the fewest 1st place voted is (are) eliminated.
(3) The second place vote totals on ballots on which the first place candidate was eliminated are added to the first place votes of the candidates that survived.
(4) Go back to step (2).

Handy graphic:

[Joao Saraiva]

Do we have a date on where we're going to start? I still have some statistical study to make, but I can make it too while the project is going.

[ZeppelinPage]

I'd like to participate, will do a trial period if necessary.

[Tesla]

I prefer the single vote for reasons stated already by penbeast0 and LA Bird.

[eminence]

I prefer the single vote for reasons stated already by penbeast0 and LA Bird.

Same as above

[Winsome Gerbil]

Aside from the occasional Laker fan voting for Kobe or Mavs fan voting for Dirk sort of stuff, I was not aware that "winning" in this process was taken so seriously as to encourage strategic voting. We should have a voting off the island feature too. And possibly pistol duels to the death.

[Moonbeam]

Honestly, I'm happy for whatever you think will be easiest to administer, trex. This is a big project, and I agree with others who say that the main benefit of this project is the discussion as opposed to the final ranking.

[wojoaderge]

any of you guys want to be part of the voter panel for this project?

Would I have to justify every single one of my votes?