Instead of the usual Gold/Silver/Bronze system, I want to propose a new system.

Each person gets X number of votes, which they can use in any way they want.

X is determined based on the puzzles that are released. My suggestions for it are:
1) The number of unique mechanisms
2) The number of new puzzles (being puzzles that aren't mods) divided by two

There should also be a default minimum, in case (god forbid) we have a ridiculously slow month. I recommend setting the minimum to 7, as in the current system, Gold gets 3 votes, sliver 2, and bronze 1.

Discussion: open!

Highlight for reason why I propose this (It's not really that important, but if you're curious):

Many new puzzles are coming out. The general idea is now, "There are too many puzzles I want to vote for." The traditional Gold Silver Bronze system doesn't allow for the preferred amount of choice.

Instead, allowing X number of votes and saying "cast where you please" would be a much more effective system.


Just a suggestion for Sandy & other developers: Maybe add a link on the sidebar to a small poll or something to allow you to vote for puzzle(s) of the month? It would be much easier to count votes, and keep track of progress.

Not to be rude, but I believe this topic has ALSO been discussed before . Im not a moderator nor pretend to be one but the search button is a wonderful tool to use before you make new threads.

On a positive note, your idea is good but requires too much from Sandy.

Puzzle of the month and year discussed here (among other places):

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18866&p=229512&hilit=Vote+for+puzzle+of+the+month#p229512

Chris

While it may be true it has been discussed before, I don't think that this thread is irrelevant.

This thread is one whose relevance changes over time. The situation may be different now. Looking past on previous puzzle of the month polls, I haven't seen as many puzzles with unique mechanisms and unique designs. The level of innovation has certainly increased with availability of various mechanisms, as well as with the experience of the creators (I don't have this experience)

Touché. But keep in mind this thread reappears almost each month (not just once a year).


Chris

Please, rather than debate this on a long-dead topic, we should discuss this system specifically. I personally think the puzzles of the month links should go on the side-bar as suggested, and I would like to point out that PuzzleMaster6262 has already manipulated the system to cast his 6 votes as you specify- however they can be. He had 3 bronze and a gold, which adds to 6 points, so he didn't break a rule. Now, the issue is, how do you determine what X is? I don't know of a formula that might fairly distribute vote count based on puzzle count.

This does not reappear each month. It has only twice before.

First thing: I think the system now is alright. It's simple, doesn't require any changes to be made from month to month, and yet it works fine. If you think about it, if we had the ability to distribute our points differently and vote on puzzles in different ways, would it make all that much of a difference in the deciding of the TOP puzzle? If it was your fourth favorite puzzle in a three tier system, it will be your fourth favorite in an x-tier system.

Second thing, which I'd like to address: Why so many topics? This could have easily gotten put into the November 2010 voting thread. It would hardly be a bump (I was looking at it 5 minutes ago), and it would have been perfectly relevant to the thread. Actually, you've posted more topics on here in the past 2 or 3 weeks than I have in almost 2 years on this website.

That's just my two cents.

Keep in mind, I've only been around a three or four weeks anyway.

I don't know the website like the back of my hand, like a lot of you here. What seems regular and habitual to you may be an entirely new way of forum operation for me.

I also don't know a lot of the old threads. Like the years-old threads? I wouldn't be familiar with them. Yes, use the search function. No, the search function doesn't return any results pertaining to this topic. I can't seem to find a thread about how puzzles should be voted on.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The number of votes per month would be remarkably simple to determine. It wouldn't need any figuring out, and after that, a computer could handle the rest. If not, it's simple to do it by hand.

X wouldn't be a complicated formula, simply because nobody would bother to calculate it if it was.

I've got a new idea for a voting system:

Unlimited votes per user, but you can only vote each puzzle once. That way you can vote for each of your favorites, and it's fairly simple to use. The ones people like stand out much better. This system would have to be a poll thread.

Intriguing!

There's one problem... There can only be less than 20 puzzles with the current poll system. Maybe we can try it this month, just as a side experiment?

EDIT: Wow! That's stupid of me. That won't work, I just contradicted myself.

If that was the case, all the great puzzles would get the same amount of votes. I liked the old system better because the battle for first place seemed close. Now only gold place votes really matter. Also when the amount of votes is expanded to three, it gets harder to chose the three best in order. One or two puzzles per month may really stand out and the other great ones all deserve second most of the time. This is why I expand my bronze vote; my favorite puzzle gets gold and the others get a highly deserved mention. This is only a mention because they have no chance of winning with this system even when they desserve it.

Also I would like to add that for puzzle of the year 2010, the first round I plan to make be nominations. This will allow great puzzles that lost puzzle of the month 1st and 2nd place to have a shot at winning the poty award.

Actually some good points were made here. I will just state my suggestions:

Gold, Silver, and Bronze are nice, and I can see that the difference between 3-2-1,
*may* be deceivingly too big. But does it really affect the final result? It seems it does not.

Using slightly decreased ratios such as 4-3-2 or 5-4-3 or even 1-1-1, still allows
a choice of three puzzles (compared to the poorly distributed method in the recent
past with only one choice). So the results are *not* that different as some may think,
because we have enough voters for it to be normally distributed. If the difference
seems bigger, that has *nothing* to do with the puzzles or anything unfair. It is just
a different way of "looking at the forest".

Just think of it from a logarithmic point of view and you will see what I am talking about.

It kind of reminds me the 2-1-0 system they used at (euro) football a couple of decades
ago. Then, they adopted the 3-1-0 system to encourage teams to win. The same way
the current system encourages people to make really good puzzles instead of average
ones. But then, the team which would win the championship, will be the same(!), regardless
if the 3-1-0 or the 2-1-0 system is used. Yes, there can be some really super rare extreme
cases, where a different team would win, but the chance for this to occur is highly unlikely
(in general), and it is much smaller than an "error margin".

So in the end of the day, there is no "perfect system". But one which distributes
the votes "fairly enough" (like those successfully used in scientific experiments)
can be simple enough for everyone to use (and understand) and have an acceptable
confidence interval. And the one we have here, is already good enough for this cause.

Of course, the more votes, the less the (already super unlikely) chances of a wrong result.




Pantazis