13 points between 1 and 4 is a little extreme.

I'll pick method #2 but I'm fine with whatever way it's done.

I like #1 and keep the increments as listed. Every year there's always a universally liked album that ends up getting way more points then deserved just because everyone put it in their top ten but never in the top three.

# 1 for me. I'm guessing tv on the radio gets the most points. Just a guess.

#1. - cause #2. could really get out of hand, I think.

Maybe 20-19-18, though? I can't decide if my top three right now are really 30-25-20...I dunno, it'll get figured out.

I prefer #2, as long as there are a few rules to keep it under control. Why not set 30 as the max score, with 1 point being the minimum? I interpret the fact that RL is willing to offer this as an option to mean that he's willing to deal with the complications.

Regardless, it looks like #1 will win out.

Personally, I think the assignment of points on a 30-25-20-17... basis is somewhat arbitrary, that is to assume that everyone's separation between 1 and 4 is that much. This is why I prefer #2, but if you go with #1, I think you should tighten up the difference at the top...still leave a greater disparity between 1 and 4, but something like 25-22-19-17-16-15, etc. instead.

I also realize it's probably a little late to be offering alternative scoring systems.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: ChaSimone,

I don't really care, but my own personal #1 is about three points better than my #4. Just the way it is this year. I'm actually leaning toward a three-way tie for first, which might make #4 even closer. Last year it was a different story, but whatever.

#1

Rl, maybe you should add a third voting option for a non-weighted scoring system (20-1 instead of 30-1). I'm cool with either, but it seems like a lot of people prefer the former.

Although both scoring systems are flawed, I have no better solution than to support #1.

quote:

Originally posted by 80 Watt:
Although both scoring systems are flawed, I have no better solution than to support #1.

What would be flawless??

Voting for #1, of course. I little diff from last year, but only for top 3 picks. Hopefully the one agreed upon is used for next year too, so their isn't a diff voting system year by year.

#1

I vote for 1.

I vote for number one, even in the way that its just frickin' easier.

quote:

Originally posted by mark f:
I don't really care, but my own personal #1 is about three points better than my #4. Just the way it is this year. I'm actually leaning toward a three-way tie for first, which might make #4 even closer. Last year it was a different story, but whatever.

Yeah, I realize this will happen for some people, but I still think it's overall more accurate than a straight one-point dropoff system. Even in your case I suspect it may be more accurate. Consider: Your #5 gets about 2/3 as many points as the average score of your top 4. Probably about right isn't it? Isn't that better than your #5 a point value that is just 7.4% lower than the average of your top 4?

quote:

Originally posted by m.leland:
13 points between 1 and 4 is a little extreme.

It may be, particularly for some lists. If anyone wants to help me come up with a more accurate point-value system for the top-20 I welcome them.

I should note that it's not the actual point-difference between differently ranked albums that matters but the percentage point- difference. #4 has a 57% value relative to #1. Possibly too much.

Basically, what we want to do is figure out how people would on average dole out their points is we had a pazznjop style system, and then try to imitate that in a straight rank system.

How about this: given 200 points you guys try and figure out how many points an average person would give for their 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th ranked albums. We can fill in the rest by simple interpolation. I may have to alter the number of points to make it all work out evenly, but the relative value of the points will remain approximately equal.

For me, this year, I'm willing to say that if number one gets 100%, then number two gets 97%, number three gets 93% and number four gets 90%. So, those would be worth points of 30-29-28-27. Now the rest, I could live with a dropping down to about 20 points for number five and more after that, but everybody's undoubtedly different.

Looking at my list right now, here's how I'd distribute 200 points, from #20-#1:

1,1,1,2,2,5,5,6,8,8,8,10,12,12,13,14,17,18,27,30


I really feel like my #1 and #2 are about twice as good as my #5. For me, there were 2 completely amazing albums this year that nothing else came close to. Obciously a typical list would not look quite like that at the top. I have no idea how other people would distribute their points though. Should the #5 get more than half as many points as the #1? What about #10? Should it be around 1/3? More? Less? Give me some feedback on what you guys think.

RL, do a test run.

Pick ten people and invite them to a private message. Ask them to assign points to their top 10 as you laid out in #2, knowing those people you invite will be responsible enough not to tilt things with the extra stack (I might give The Hold Steady 181 points—invite me!). After that, average it out between 1 and 2, 2 and 3, 3 and 4, etc.

Of course, I'd never go through that much trouble, but it's at least a method that might approach the mean.

Also, I'm drunk. Feel free to ignore me.

quote:

Originally posted by m.leland:
RL, do a test run.

That's a good idea. I'll get on it tomorrow.