Looney Labs Icehouse Mailing list Archive

[Icehouse] IGDC rankings idea

  • FromJeff Zeitlin <icehouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • DateWed, 20 Feb 2008 09:19:36 -0500
It's been pointed out how a small number of ballots in the current
scheme can cause wide variance in the final outcomes of the competition.
Elsewhere, I've encountered a system that MAY have the happy side effect
of reducing the chances of that happening.

Currently, the ballot requires a straight ranking: I like Zendo better
than Ice Towers better than Martian Backgammon better than Spicklehead.
It doesn't take into account that a particular voter may feel that Zendo
is only marginally better in his opinion than Ice Towers, but both are
WAY COOL, and that Spicklehead is WAY below Martian Backgammon.  His
vote is completely countered by someone who feels "Eh" about all four
games, and rates them Spicklehead, Martian Backgammon, Ice Towers,

The system I encountered says "You have x points.  Allocate them as you
see fit among the choices." X is a function of how many choices there
are on the ballot - the particular example I encountered said "two
points per choice on the ballot".

Suppose the IGDC says 'ten points per choice on the ballot'.  In the
example above, each voter can share 40 points among the four choices.
So, the first voter goes with Z=20, I=12, M=6, S=2.  The second voter
goes with S=12, M=11, I=9, Z=8.

The two votes no longer counter each other; the strong feelings of the
first voter "weigh more heavily" than the generally neutral feelings of
the second.

Does this have possibilities?