Difference between revisions of "Talk:Geohashing Day 2011 Extravaganza"

From Geohashing
imported>Ekorren
(Voting system)
 
imported>Crox
Line 9: Line 9:
 
I'm tempted to add more locations only to break the ban of reconsidering.
 
I'm tempted to add more locations only to break the ban of reconsidering.
 
--[[User:Ekorren|Ekorren]] 06:38, 11 January 2011 (EST)
 
--[[User:Ekorren|Ekorren]] 06:38, 11 January 2011 (EST)
 +
 +
:*I agree with you on the large vs epic issue. But I guess this choice is part of everyone's vote. (Ideally it should be large '''and''' epic!) If by "fail" you mean "risk that we fail to reach the coordinates", I think it's not a big deal, as long as we have fun doing an expedition with a bunch of incredible people. If you mean "only a small group" I think it's not an issue neither, since if we assume that people will vote for a place where they would be likely to attend, the one with the most votes should be the one with the largest group. Of course if a lot of people who do not plan to attend in any case vote it could be different.
 +
:*The ranking system is described [[wikipedia:Schulze method|here]]. But I haven't studied it yet so I can't answer your question. (and hence I haven't voted yet :o)
 +
:*I guess you could add "Himalayas" as option "I" and revote.
 +
:--[[User:Crox|Crox]] 07:06, 11 January 2011 (EST)

Revision as of 12:06, 11 January 2011

Voting system

Now that I re-read the rules and thought about it I see that the voting system may be all shiny and geeky but I see some flaws in the setup.

  • IMHO, a large GH meetup should rather try to be large than to be epic but small. I have a certain feeling that this system will result in an epic fail of a small group.
  • Please add information how unrated options are counted. Worst/best/don't care? Because people seem to only rate locations they might like, which in case of "don't care" would effectively put the lower rated below the unrated.
  • Please allow to change votes

I'm tempted to add more locations only to break the ban of reconsidering. --Ekorren 06:38, 11 January 2011 (EST)

  • I agree with you on the large vs epic issue. But I guess this choice is part of everyone's vote. (Ideally it should be large and epic!) If by "fail" you mean "risk that we fail to reach the coordinates", I think it's not a big deal, as long as we have fun doing an expedition with a bunch of incredible people. If you mean "only a small group" I think it's not an issue neither, since if we assume that people will vote for a place where they would be likely to attend, the one with the most votes should be the one with the largest group. Of course if a lot of people who do not plan to attend in any case vote it could be different.
  • The ranking system is described here. But I haven't studied it yet so I can't answer your question. (and hence I haven't voted yet :o)
  • I guess you could add "Himalayas" as option "I" and revote.
--Crox 07:06, 11 January 2011 (EST)