I want to hear your feedback below from everyone. Based on what we get back, we'll roll improvements into future votes, or if need be, reset the vote and do it again; I know a lot of you are active here or at least more involved, so the relatively low turnout is a warning canary for me. Leave your comments below, and expect another story in a few days to see how we're using your comments.
(Score: 1) by islisis on Thursday April 24 2014, @02:56AM
I'm reposting from this thread [soylentnews.org] because I'm still interested in any answer
I presume the inverted 'rank' numbers are employed as it's claimed "In a sense, it's more like moderating than voting."
Why should we need to moderate the candidates, when the result calls for a single name? A vote determines what we prefer, not what we scored. If it is a moderated event, the implementation makes no sense. What is the reason for barring multiple "9" ratings? The quasi-ranked input is completely arbitrary.
If it is based on a voting algorithm instead, do you have information about the one you employed? For instance what how it might result in the outcome commented in the official help [soylentnews.org]:
"You might even only vote for one, since in a close race your second number could actually break a tie - and not in your favor."