Media On the unfairness of the "beez"

[GremioPower]

a wannabe Beez

A wannabeez, then.

Regardless, you assume too much. I have another thread ready for posting on a different award, which I have no chance of winning either.

 

[Yakker]

Yeah, *hic* what he said

 

[Tonga Bob]

Sweet, 4th Day of S31 Semifinal Round Week
​

Dear Sweetians,

I hope this message finds you well.

A week ago, NaturalDisaster, our Admin, has set the "beez" voting process:



Hence, according to the rule quoted above, the distribution of points in any given beez vote is:

​

01. 40 points​

02. 37 points​

03. 35 points​

04. 33 points​

05. 31 points​

06. 29 points​

07. 27 points​

08. 25 points​

09. 23 points​

10. 21 points​

11. 19 points​

12. 17 points​

13. 15 points​

14. 13 points​

15. 11 points​

16. 09 points​

17. 07 points​

18. 05 points​

19. 03 points​

20. 01 point​

This is nothing new. That's how it has been, if not always, since quite awhile. It is also absolutely unfair.

At first glance, it seems good enough. However, this allocation promotes being on top of the list rather than being voted.

My concern is also not new. I have made similar complaint to ND's predecessor, Ant Bear. I'm willing to keep on fighting against it.

There are 60 electors (5 per club). As it is, someone voted unanimously, but always as #20, would finish below someone voted twice as #5. It is better being voted once as #1, then 39 times at #20.

Those are examples of things that should not happen. They are not, at least, I believe they are not in the spirit of the award.

There are more than one way to fix this. It doesn't matter which one the Committee and the Administration ultimately chooses, but the current rule must change.

It may be late for this season, but not for from S32 onwards. Let's do what is right.

Thank you all for your attention.

Yours truly,
GremioPower

​

 

[jackster83]

 

[GremioPower]

NaturalDisaster

I actually agree. I almost wrote something similar, but as usual, it seemed like too much effort.

Goose said:

<<The current process results in an over emphasis on the high votes in comparison to the mid to low votes..​

It in theory it rewards being super popular to small number of voters as opposed to being fairly popular to a large number.​

I think someone appearing in 20 voters list in spots 15 to 20 adds more value to the comp than someone who appears on 3 or 4 lists in the top 5. ​

I'd just add 10 to each score.>>​