Dale Sheldon wrote:
* For each game, all non-X votes are added together, and divided by the
number of non-X votes _plus_1_; this is the game's score.
So a game's score isn't the average of the scores it receives, but
rather just a bit lower than the average of the scores it receives, with
that degradation based on the number of scores it got?
Mathematically is this any different from:
"For each game, the score is the mean of all non-X scores, times (N/N+1)
where N is the number of non-X scores."
If the goals of this scoring mechanism is "it's better to score better,
and it's better to get more scores" then that's what you're getting.
My only fear is that the 0-99 range is so large that arbitrary decisions
each judge makes about how wide a distribution within that range to use
will all dramatically effect the final scores.