On the APE Voting

This topic contains 21 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by Profile photo of The Janitor The Janitor 11 years, 2 months ago.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 22 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #38109
    Profile photo of brickbrock
    brickbrock
    Member

    Hi everyone,

    First of all I want to make clear that I am very happy with the results and my nomination (and relative success) of the APE contest. However, the detailed rankings leave me somewhat puzzled. Thus, have a few remarks on the voting math:

    From the Table in the events section you can see that a number of 300 points was awarded per category. With at least 20 voters (on the News page 21 are mentioned) this is max. 15 points per voter.

    The Events page suggests a voting procedure that works like this:

    Once the nomination committee has completed their task, the nominees will be announced and the winners will be chosen by a voting system. All contestants whose film was not nominated, along with all 24fps or greater Patrons without nominated films will be asked to rank the nominees in each of the categories listed below. A film ranked at the top of a category will receive a number of points for that category equal to the number of nominations, a film ranked second will receive one fewer point, and so on. Each of the categories will be weighted and an overall score for each film will then be calculated.

    With 10 nominees this suggests 10 points for the first 9 for the second and so on in each category. Clearly the sum of the numbers 1 to 10 is 55, which naturally should be the number of points awarded per voter per category. So there is a difference.

    I assume that the voting procedure had been changed to a more competitive one, where the winner recieves some points the second a few less the third a few more less and so forth. Films below a certain score receive no points.

    With this post I do not suggest, that the ranking of the APE contest should be redone. BUT I would like RevMen to give a clear anouncement how it was done (which leaves me less puzzled with less then 20 points in some categories for some entries with more than 20 voters). :?

    Still happy with this great contest and its great results lurking around on my harddisk :)

    brickbrock

    #38113
    Profile photo of hali
    hali
    Member

    You just beat me to this. It only hit me at work toady that something did not seem right with ‘the numbers’. I was a bit confused during the ceremony… but I was also tired + excited…

    Rev?

    Hali

    EDIT:

    Rev, I’ve worked out the tallies based upon the marking scheme listed on the entries page… (doing things like awarding 1st 10 points… an equal 2nd 9points… then 4th 7 points [taking into acount 2x 2nd place cutting out third]) I am not going to post it here. I think this needs some looking into.

    EDIT 2:
    On the events page it lists me as 3rd in story, but holgor came 3rd… the numbers reflect the actual placing, but it does need updating.

    #38118
    Profile photo of richardfrost
    richardfrost
    Member

    “hali” wrote: You just beat me to this. It only hit me at work toady

    There’s no need to call him names.

    I think there’s a conspiracy here. Where’s Jarrah?

    #38120
    Profile photo of LowweeK
    LowweeK
    Member

    I was thinking of this too.
    And on another subject, I do think that weighting the Story by 50% is a bit too much. Maybe we should later diminish the overweighting of the story and give those extra points to the other criteria.
    I do think that story is THAT important, but here its weight was quite directly conditionning the final result, no matter the others ratings were.

    #38121
    Profile photo of hali
    hali
    Member

    “richardfrost” wrote: [quote=”hali”]You just beat me to this. It only hit me at work toady

    There’s no need to call him names.

    I think there’s a conspiracy here. Where’s Jarrah?[/quote]

    LOL! That is a classic typo! :lol:

    Obviously I meant ‘tiny little disease spreading gnat’

    #38131
    Profile photo of brickbrock
    brickbrock
    Member

    Loweek wrote:

    And on another subject, I do think that weighting the Story by 50% is a bit too much. Maybe we should later diminish the overweighting of the story and give those extra points to the other criteria.
    I do think that story is THAT important, but here its weight was quite directly conditionning the final result, no matter the others ratings were.

    This also is a result of the ‘steeper’ distribution of points within one category. If there are differences up to 25 and more points the diffrence in a 10% category had to be 250 points to make up for that.

    at Hali,
    luckily, it is not possible to recalculate the results from the table that was posted in ‘Events’ as this is already the _result_ of the combined votes. The points for the individual votes would have to be adjusted to get it right according to the posted voting scheme. But I think you already realized that by yourself…

    brickbrock

    #38135
    Profile photo of hali
    hali
    Member

    “brickbrock” wrote:

    at Hali,
    luckily, it is not possible to recalculate the results from the table that was posted in ‘Events’ as this is already the _result_ of the combined votes. The points for the individual votes would have to be adjusted to get it right according to the posted voting scheme. But I think you already realized that by yourself…

    brickbrock

    I’m not sure I agree with you.

    Seems to me the number in each box is either the total tally of votes for each movie in each category (of which the numbers are totally weird based upon your comments above) or some reduced (out of 100 maybe? a factor?) value.

    [a third option is that they have been decided upon in a new way, which you expressed above that you’d like to know]

    Now if the values are simply reduced or factors, then the numerical order (whatever the points) will remain the same, and following on, the rankings do not change. Thus applying the “First gets 10 points. Second gets 9″ etc etc allows you to set up a table.

    The big issue is that using the system described in the rules ensures the difference between places (apart from tied places and the next one down) is ALWAYS 1 point. This is what can make huge differences when you apply the set weightings of 50% 30% 10% and 10%.

    Not using the rankings (10, 9, 8, 7, etc) when applying the weightings has caused much more of a skew in the story category as the differences between 1st and 2nd (20) as well as 2nd and 3rd (17) are huge.

    [/i]

    #38138
    Profile photo of brickbrock
    brickbrock
    Member

    Hali wrote

    Now if the values are simply reduced or factors, then the numerical order (whatever the points) will remain the same, and following on, the rankings do not change. Thus applying the “First gets 10 points. Second gets 9″ etc etc allows you to set up a table.

    I have to admit that the idea that the numbers could simply be scaled down by a factor never occured to me :oops: . (Although its seems a miracle that the result is only integers) The “First gets 10 points. Second gets 9″-scale applies in my reading only to to the individual rankings by the voters, not to the combined ranking.

    Lets wait for RevMen sorting this out

    brickbrock

    #38141
    Profile photo of
    Anonymous

    Yes, the votingsystem has changed compared with the Events-page. For details see the “APE contest – how to vote” thread … http://www.brickfilms.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3503

    Every voter has named the best five films in each category and the point where given that 5 points go to the best and 1 for the 5th best film. That makes 5 + 4 + 3 + 2 + 1 = 15 points by each voter in every category.

    The sum of each category is 300 points, so we had 20 voters.

    The only question is, why there are 21 voters listed on the News-page?
    Perhaps The Sisters have voted together …

    Dirk.

    #38147
    Profile photo of brickbrock
    brickbrock
    Member

    :oops: sometimes it pays to read first…

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 22 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.