Character Popularity Poll

[PH7]

10. General Tarquin
9. Vaarsuvius
8. Redcloak
7. Roy
6. Lord Shojo
5. Durkon
4. The oracle
3. O-chul
2. Belkar
1. Xykon

[Bob_McSurly]

@Bob McSurley: I definitely wouldn't want one vote per person in the wildcard blocks, that only makes sense in one on one balloting.

Picking four has been suggested, but honestly I think people will have a tough time picking four in some blocks. So I'm thinking of doing something a bit more flexible.

Each voter gets 4 points for each block, that they can divide up however they choose...

Let me know what you think?

That system essentially collapses down to plurality. The lesser of two evils type of tactical voting still has all the same appeals, you just have to do it three times. Which means the spoiler effect is still totally there.
My personal recommendation would be "vote for as many candidates as you want, but not more than once per candidate". This mostly eliminates the spoiler effect, and since whether you vote for one candidate doesn't affect whether you can vote for another candidate, there is a lot less incentive to vote tactically.
If you do want it weighted somehow, you could just use a very simple version of range voting. Like say, give each candidate a 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4. This has the same advantages mentioned above, but still allows the voters to express preference for one candidate over another. Picking four isn't quite as good as picking as many as you want, but it still beats systems where you have a set number of points/votes to give out and can give them all to one person. And don't forget Condorcet! It gives a bit less freedom than range voting does, but is a much more fun system to run! (if you're a complete nerd like me. Otherwise, range is much more fun, because it's substantially simpler:)
Thanks!
P.S
Seriously. A System that essentially reproduces plurality and still punishes dumb and/or honest people as much as plurality voting, while appearing to be real voting reform, is a very bad thing. :)

[Comrade]

10. Xykon.
9. Roy.
8. O-Chul.
7. Belkar.
6. Lien.
5. Laurin.

I don't really feel particularly strongly about any of the other characters, so I guess I'll cap mine off prematurely.

[knag]

Do you mean the Snail or the Snarl?

The Snail. From the Dragon/Gygax magazine continuity.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Each voter gets 4 points for each block, that they can divide up however they choose...

Let me know what you think?

Going to recommend Alternative (or preferential) Voting.

It has issues (such as a candidate that is everyone's second choice, but no-one's first), but it does avoid (or rather, incorporates) strategic voting.

GW

[Sylian]

What do you think of Tactical Voting here?

I think it ruins the integrity of the competition. Based on the original post, you are supposed to rank from your favorite character to your tenth favorite character. It's also fun to see how much people like different characters, but if they're voting tactically, then that muddies the data.

[maxon]

Well, I don't know - there are many great characters in the comic though I do tend to boring good guys.

10 Bandana
9 MiTD
8 Shojo
7 Mr Scruffy
6 Blackwing
5 Durkon
4 Roy
3 Elan
2 Haley
1 Vaarsuvius

[LadyEowyn]

I agree with the idea of using a ranked ballot (alternative voting) for the wild card spots. Eliminates strategic voting and lets people vote for the characters they actually like best.

Also, I love that the OOTS forum is apparently full of electoral reform nerds.

[hroþila]

Tactical voting? Whoa, this is more serious than I thought. Perhaps I should have considered my votes for longer than one minute.

[Peelee]

Going to recommend Alternative (or preferential) Voting.

It has issues (such as a candidate that is everyone's second choice, but no-one's first), but it does avoid (or rather, incorporates) strategic voting.

GW

I'm guessing that is the same as ranked choice voting (can't watch the video atm)? If so, I second the motion.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Tactical voting? Whoa, this is more serious than I thought. Perhaps I should have considered my votes for longer than one minute.

Sayre's Law

I'm guessing that is the same as ranked choice voting (can't watch the video atm)? If so, I second the motion.

It is, unless the way to count the votes differs in some way. Here, in each step, the lowest vote is discarded, and all votes recalculated based on remaining preferences, until an option has absolute majority.

GW

[Jasdoif]

My personal recommendation would be "vote for as many candidates as you want, but not more than once per candidate". This mostly eliminates the spoiler effect, and since whether you vote for one candidate doesn't affect whether you can vote for another candidate, there is a lot less incentive to vote tactically.

Narrowing down a wide field to one choice does indeed seem like a good candidate for approval voting.

[Bob_McSurly]

Going to recommend Alternative (or preferential) Voting.

It has issues (such as a candidate that is everyone's second choice, but no-one's first), but it does avoid (or rather, incorporates) strategic voting.

GW

It is still sometimes to a voter's advantage to rank a more popular candidate higher than a candidate they actually prefer in AV. And if you give a "strong" candidate your top spot, you can't also give it to your actual favourite. In range voting, it is never to a voter's advantage to rate a candidate higher than someone they prefer to that candidate, and even if you want to give a "strong" candidate your top score, it is always in your best interest to also give your top score to your actual favourite.
Furthermore the Alternative vote is a ranked (ordinal) system, so it is bound by Arrow's Impossibility Theorem, while Range voting, being a rating (cardinal) system, is not.
I would argue that it is also easier to count in this case, because you can very easily keep a running tally, whereas AV requires you to do all the eliminations and what not at the end.

[alwaysbebatman]

I think that the goals of this thing make strategic voting a very different thing than if we were electing an emperor for life or whatever. In political elections it's rational to vote for a candidate who has a good shot, but you prefer slightly less than a long shot, because you don't want to "waste your vote."

We're just aggregating our community favorites, so strategic voting works in the opposite direction: "Vaarsuvius is my actual favorite, but they have plenty of support already, I like Greysky almost as much, and he needs my vote more.

It should also be kept in mind that the research on the theoretically best balloting systems people are referencing are based on secret ballots. Whereas we have perfect information on the ballots preceding ours and none on later ballots. So I don't think there's anything wrong with saying "I didn't realize Ancient Black Dragon would get no love at all, that changes things for me, I'm changing my ballot." Since that's exactly what I did...

(Keep in mind, if you want to change your ballot, don't go back and edit the original post-- I won't know you did that! Make a new post saying what you want to change.)

Okay, so here is the new Top 12. Shojo displaced Malack!

Rank )	Name :	Points ,	Ballots ,	Average ,	10s
1 )	Vaarsuvius :	304 ,	43 ,	7.07 ,	10
2 )	Redcloak :	298 ,	41 ,	7.27 ,	6
3 )	O-Chul :	280 ,	42 ,	6.67 ,	8
4 )	Roy Greenhilt :	237 ,	39 ,	6.08 ,	4
5 )	Belkar Bitterleaf :	216 ,	37 ,	5.84 ,	6
6 )	The Monster :	213 ,	33 ,	6.45 ,	7
7 )	Elan :	178 ,	32 ,	5.56 ,	3
8 )	Haley Starshine :	165 ,	32 ,	5.16 ,	0
9 )	Durkon Thundershield :	146 ,	29 ,	5.03 ,	2
10 )	Xykon :	134 ,	26 ,	5.15 ,	2
11 )	General Tarquin :	131 ,	24 ,	5.46 ,	2
12 )	Lord Shojo :	90 ,	20 ,	4.50 ,	0

13 Block	14 Block
Malack 83	Beatrix "Bandana" Secundus 46
Blackwing 64	Lien 43
Celia 63	Therkla 41
Miko Miyazaki 55	Thog 40
Gary Gygax 7	The Oracle of the Sunken Valley 9
Enor 6	CPPD Chief 9
Greysky Cleric of Loki 6	The Flumphs 9
Dave Arneson 6	Tsukiko 8
Daigo 5	Banjo 8
	TVFKA Gontor Hammerfell 8
	Inkyrius 8
	"Squid Thingy" 8

15 Block	16 Block
Right Eye 36	Demon Roaches 4
Mr.Scruffy 29	Ian Starshine 4
IFCC 25	Bloodfeast the Extremeinator 4
Veldrina 22	Zz'dtri 4
Greyview 22	Eric Greenhilt 4
Sabine 19	Thor 4
Lord Hinjo 18	Prime Minister Jirix 3
Ho Thanh 17	Leeky Windstaff 3
Nale 15	The Snail 3
TVFKA Durkon Thundershield 14	Jiminy (of Polearm Emorium) 2
Kazumi Kato 13	Oona 2
Julio Scoundrél 12	Wrecan 2
Laurin Shattersmith 12	Zhou Bo 2
Gannji 11	Ancient Black Dragon 2
	Odin 1
	Soon Kim 1
	Qarr 1

[NontheistCleric]

10 Nale
9 Former Hobgoblin Supreme Leader
8 Lord Shojo
7 Redcloak
6 Vaarsuvius
5 Malack
4 O-Chul
3 Gannji
2 The Oracle of the Sunken Valley
1 Bloodfeast the Extremeinator

[alwaysbebatman]

Rank )	Name :	Points ,	Ballots ,	Average ,	10s
1 )	Vaarsuvius :	310 ,	44 ,	7.05 ,	10
2 )	Redcloak :	305 ,	42 ,	7.26 ,	6
3 )	O-Chul :	284 ,	43 ,	6.60 ,	8
4 )	Roy Greenhilt :	237 ,	39 ,	6.08 ,	4
5 )	Belkar Bitterleaf :	216 ,	37 ,	5.84 ,	6
6 )	The Monster :	213 ,	33 ,	6.45 ,	7
7 )	Elan :	178 ,	32 ,	5.56 ,	3
8 )	Haley Starshine :	165 ,	32 ,	5.16 ,	0
9 )	Durkon Thundershield :	146 ,	29 ,	5.03 ,	2
10 )	Xykon :	134 ,	26 ,	5.15 ,	2
11 )	General Tarquin :	131 ,	24 ,	5.46 ,	2
12 )	Lord Shojo :	98 ,	21 ,	4.67 ,	0

Anybody know where I might find a smiley for Hobgoblin Supreme Leader? The one with the purple headdress...

13 Block	14 Block
Malack 88	Miko Miyazaki 55
Blackwing 64	Beatrix "Bandana" Secundus 46
Celia 63	Lien 43
Lord Hinjo 18	Therkla 41
Ho Thanh 17	Thog 40
Gannji 14	Right Eye 36
TVFKA Durkon Thundershield 14	Mr.Scruffy 29
Kazumi Kato 13	IFCC 25
Julio Scoundrél 12	Nale 25
Laurin Shattersmith 12	Veldrina 22
The Oracle of the Sunken Valley 11	Greyview 22
	Sabine 19

15 Block	16 Block
CPPD Chief 9	Hobgoblin Supreme Leader 9
The Flumphs 9	TVFKA Gontor Hammerfell 8
Inkyrius 8	Tsukiko 8
"Squid Thingy" 8	Banjo 8
Gary Gygax 7	Enor 6
Dave Arneson 6	Greysky Cleric of Loki 6
Bloodfeast the Extremeinator 5	Daigo 5
Eric Greenhilt 4	Zz'dtri 4
Thor 4	Demon Roaches 4
Prime Minister Jirix 3	Ian Starshine 4
The Snail 3	Leeky Windstaff 3
Wrecan 2	Jiminy (of Polearm Emorium) 2
Zhou Bo 2	Oona 2
Ancient Black Dragon 2	Soon Kim 1
Odin 1	Qarr 1

[Present 2.0]

You've forgotten Oona with 2 Points in your last List.

[alwaysbebatman]

You've forgotten Oona with 2 Points in your last List.

Corrected! Thank you!

[Sylian]

"I didn't realize Ancient Black Dragon would get no love at all, that changes things for me, I'm changing my ballot." Since that's exactly what I did...

I think there is something wrong with this (not "wrong" in the ethical sense, though). We are asked to rank candidates based on our top 10 personal list. From strategic voting, I could give, say, Right-Eye a 10, since I think he's an underrated character that deserves to be higher. While I do like Right-Eye quite a bit, he is not my favorite character, and thus I only gave him 3 points.

What my actual vote looks like (don't count this again, I've already voted on page 2)

Spoiler

Show

10 P: Vaarsuvius
9 P: Redcloak
8 P: O-Chul
7 P: Elan
6 P: Belkar Bitterleaf
5 P: Durkon Thundershield
4 P: Roy Greenhilt
3 P: Right-Eye
2 P: Haley Starshine
1 P: Lord Shojo

What my new vote might look like if I were to change (note that I'm not actually changing my vote, just providing an example)

Spoiler

Show

10 P: Right-Eye
9 P. Elan
8 P. Vaarsuvius
7 P: Belkar Bitterleaf
6 P: Durkon Thundershield
5 P: Lord Shojo
4 P: Rat
3 P: Tiger
2 P: Pig
1 P: Monkey

With this, I've given Right-Eye a solid boost, since he was pretty low on the list. Elan is far from moving up, so I might as well give him a solid boost, since he's my 4th favorite character. Vaarsuvius is my favorite character, so V should get a high score as well (perhaps even higher, I'm not sure). Redcloak, who is my second favorite character, and O-Chul, who is my third favorite character, are only close to my favorite character. It thus makes sense to give them 0 points.

Belkar gets a solid boost since I like him more than the Monster in the Darkness (as a character in the story, anyway), and he's far enough from Elan for me not to worry about that at the moment. Durkon get 6 points since he's far away enough from Elan not to threaten him. Roy, who originally got 4 points, and Haley, who originally got 2 points, now get 0, since Roy threatens Belkar and Haley threatens Elan and Durkon. I give 5 points to Lord Shojo since he threatens no one else so I might as well give him a boost.

After that I'm out of characters to boost, so I might as well throw my remaining votes away on characters no one has voted for. In this case, Rat, Tiger, Pig, and Monkey, but I could find some other character if need be.

This, I believe, is problematic. My original vote illustrated approximately how much I liked the different characters. My new*, tactical vote does not. I think it's better if people just vote for the characters they like the most instead of bothering with tactical voting.

*The example one, I'm not actually changing my vote.

[alwaysbebatman]

I'm not suggesting that everyone should fully gamify and strategize their ballot. Just that we aren't doing a secret ballot, so who's gotten love so far and who voters may feel is underated is bound to influence ballots at least subconsciously.

Those who vote early have less information of that sort than those who vote later, so I don't see a problem with letting them say that they've changed their minds.

[Dr.Zero]

Please, remember to notify me when we start to vote for the voting system.
Or when we start to vote to decide the voting system to vote the voting system.
Or... well, I guess you can sense the pattern, here.

My first proposal is, anyway, dictatorship where I alone decide and my previous list is the ultimate result anyway.
As a backup proposal, I agree with whichever voting system might help my list to reach absolute poweeeer.

Edited to add obscure strip reference, which might have been missed.

[alwaysbebatman]

I propose a benign dictatorship where I accept suggestions and ideas about stuff like tournament format and voting, but make the ultimate call.

For example, I started with the idea of one bye and two wildcards, but there was significant support for a more symmetrical tournament. I hated the idea of both top seeds getting a bye, but didn't hate the idea of four wildcards, as long as the one in the 16 slot was significantly weak, as an appropriate reward for first seed.

Similarly, I was leaning towards each balloters having a set number of points to divide how they like among each wildcard block. But listening to different perspectives on this, I am now leaning towards a simplified Likert scale: you can give approval, or STRONG approval to as many candidates as you choose in the wildcards. Ie: 0,1, or 2 points. I think this will do a good job of genuinely capturing the group sentiment towards these characters.

If you agree, let me know. If you feel strongly that we should try something else there are still a few hours to change my mind. (If you're not too busy watching The Defenders)

I have also given all due consideration to the Dr Zero-ocracy proposal, and reject is as being "no fun."

[Bob_McSurly]

You did see that I edited my vote a few minutes after I first posted it, right?
ETA: I edited it before you posted a tally that included it.

[Bob_McSurly]

Also, I fully support the 0,1, or 2 voting system you proposed

[alwaysbebatman]

I just double-checked my spreadsheet and it matches your ballot as currently shown in the thread. If you changed it only minutes after posting, I likely never saw the original version. But I'm glad you asked me to check, best not to assume!

Thanks for the vote of confidence on my balloting scheme for the Wildcard blocks.

Keep in mind that the actual one on one matchups will be simple FPTP voting: each person votes for one of the two. Or abstains if they can't decide between the two.

A lot of the alternative voting schemes seem like a way to efficiently play out a whole tournament with one ballot and tabulation.

A tournament does about the same thing, but is designed to take longer and be more dramatic. In other words, more suitable to a fun pastime, as opposed to making an important decision...

In all this talk about balloting schemes, I forgot I was also going to talk about scheduling. My idea is to post a few contests today, and everyone would have two days to debate and five days to vote, and next Saturday afternoon a winner is declared. Then on Tuesday put up another batch, with the same kind of schedule: debate Tuesday and Wednesday, voting open Thursday through Tuesday. If we stagger like that, we should always have something going on, but not so much at a time as to be overwhelming, and we should be done in about a month. (Well, the finals would be posted in a month, ultimate winner declared a week after that.)

So, here's my full proposed schedule:

Open Debate	Open Voting	Declare Winner	Matchups
8/19	8/21	8/26	14 Block Wildcard
			15 Block Wildcard
			7 Seed v 10 S
8/22	8/24	8/29	16 Block Wildcard
			13 Block Wildcard
			9 Seed v 8 S
8/26	8/28	9/2	3 Seed v 14 Wildcard
			2 Seed v 15 Wildcard
			11 Seed v 6 S
8/29	8/31	9/5	1 S v 16 W
			4 S v 13 W
			5 S v 12 S
9/2	9/4	9/9	Winner (3 v 14) v W(11 v 6)
			W(7v10) v W(15v2)
9/5	9/7	9/12	W(1v16) v w(9v8)
			w(5v12) v w(13v4)
9/9	9/11	9/16	Semifinal of 2S and 3S Branches
9/12	9/14	9/19	Semifinal of 1S and 4S Branches
9/19	9/21	9/26	FINALS!

[Jasdoif]

A tournament does about the same thing, but is designed to take longer and be more dramatic. In other words, more suitable to a fun pastime, as opposed to making an important decision...

Since I didn't notice this being mentioned (although I could easily have missed it), is there any particular reason you decided to run a single-elimination tournament instead of a Swiss-system tournament?

[alwaysbebatman]

Actual reason: habit. It's what I've done in the past.

Post facto justification: drama. Single-elimination tournaments are built for drama more than getting the most equitable result. Every competitor is always on their last chance to survive to the next round. As opposed to "I have more points now. I wonder how much that will matter?"

I mean, we're doing this for the fun of it, why not maximize drama?

ETA: Voting for seeding is final now. You may still vote in the popularity poll and OP Present 2.0 will track your ballot, but it will no longer count towards seeding or wildcard block placement in the forthcoming Favorite Character Tournament.

I am doing some last-minute rejiggering of the Wildcard Blocks and will then open the first three matchups for debate.

[Sylian]

Oh, it's not double-elimination? Why not? Strong loser bracket runs can be really hype.

[alwaysbebatman]

Look at that schedule! Just a single elimination is a lot to keep us busy for a month.

Split the difference: I could go along with adding a "Semifinal- Losers" battle for 3rd?

[Shamash]

Here we go:

10 P:Greyview.
9 P: Blackwing.
8 P: Lord Shojo.
7 P: Demon Roaches.
6 P: Xykon.
5 P: Malack.
4 P: Gontor Hammerfell.
3 P: Tsukiko.
2 P: Lien.
1 P: Cleric of Loki.