OlympicIRL

@mrv86 Thanks for explaining, I understand what you mean now. But I think that’s not the fairest system. For example, pretend the Italian jury with 5 members voting for 5 different songs as first preference and 5 different songs as 2nd preference. That means 10/12 votes in the combined are already used. And then a song which received 10 points from all 5 members (50 combined points) would only receive 2 points in the combined. Even though it is the most liked in general and probably deserves the combined 12 points. Also, another example. A song which receives 11 points from all 5 members (55 combined) would be ranked behind a song that receives a single 12 from one member and nothing from the other members. I think that would not be a reflection of the overall taste. There needs to be a balance if possible between allowing for the overall favourites to be rewarded fairly but also allowing individual preferences to appear in there too.

I’ll try make one soon, been a bit hectic for me lately

Thanks for voting I’m not sure if I understand how that system works. Maybe you could explain it further.

I think imposing that on multi juries and not on other juries would be unfair. I personally don’t see the need to rank all 30-40 songs. I spend a lot of time analysing my favourites to make sure I award them the points I think they deserve. If I had to do the same for 40 songs it would mean I wouldn’t be able to spend that time to make the quality analysis.

I was going to include your option but it was too similar to (b) with 16 points so I thought, better not

Totallympics International Song Contest: Rule Change Question Ok so given how the voting was going (everyone voting for Option A) and due to some comments about agreeing but having concerns about the points format, I think the fairest thing is to scrap the original poll and continue with a revised one. The revised poll will still allow users to disagree with any proposed changes, however, instead of having a simple agree, disagree, this poll will offer a range of options in terms of the format. So to remind everyone of the background of this poll, on the TISC Annual 2020 thread, @Dunadan has brought up the idea of changing the internal voting format for multi-member juries as he feels the current system in large multi-member juries means that the preferences of one member can be completely wiped out by the combined voting. As such I thought it would be a worthwhile exercise to gauge the opinion of the wider TISC community on this issue. It is important to be clear here that this does not mean that a large multi-member jury will award more points than any other jury. The internal points will be combined as normal to create a set of points from 12 to 1, in the same way that all national juries will award their points. ******************** Question: In the case of multi-member juries with more than 3 jury members, the internal voting should be structured to allow each member of that jury to award points in which of the following formats? (a) 18-15-12-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 (b) 16-13-11-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 (c) 15-12-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 (d) 14-11-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 (e) 12-11-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 Apologies to all who voted in the original poll. Thank you for your votes and opinions as you have enabled a more clear and accurate poll to be created. However, I need you all to read through the revised poll and again cast a vote for your preference. We will put a deadline of Friday, 31st January 21:00 GMT for members to vote on this issue and whatever option receives the majority vote, the result of this poll will be implemented in time for the upcoming TISC Annual 2020 in Algeria and the rules will be edited accordingly. Only users who have participated in a previous TISC event are permitted to vote in this poll. I will not participate in the vote unless there is a tie in the result at which point I will cast a vote to break the deadlock. Thank you for continued your attention @bestmen @konig @LDOG @KingOfTheRhinos @titicow @vinipereira @intoronto @Manulete @Function CR Lee @dcro @Agger @Wumo @thepharoah @Finnator123 @Bohemia @Benolympique @uk12points @Janakis @Vektor @Fly_like_a_don @Griff88 @Ruslan @Werloc @Glen @mrv86 @Ionoutz24 @heywoodu @Wanderer @Skijumpingmaster @rybak @kungshamra71 @IoNuTzZ @DaniSRB @hckosice @justony @Cobi @Belle @amen09 @tuniscof @dezbee2008 @Olympian1010 @stefanbg @Damian @catgamer @Quasit @Dolby @Monzanator @kungshamra71 @FC Mezhgorye @Jur @Memo @Argenis Gonzalez @Henry_Leon @SteveParker @Pablita @Gianlu33

Ok thanks guys for these suggestions. I will allow the original poll to stand for now but I’m definitely seeing the need for a supplementary question or maybe even a poll to replace this one. Almost everyone is agreeing that it is worthwhile to change the format for multi-member juries but the format might need tweaked. I think a better poll then might not be to ask if users agree yes or no, but to create a poll with a range of formats and one option for to keep the status quo and then we will be able to gauge the most desirable option. I’ll see if I can create a new post with a more detailed range of options and tag everyone on it.

I think that’s a fair suggestion so if the new change is implemented we will look at it after the contest and maybe even after each of the first couple of editions to see if it is proving effective. One thing to look for is whether (a) the favourite of each member is making it into the combined vote and (b) whether the songs that are being voted for by each member or by the majority are still making it in also. I think if those 2 conditions are being met it will prove to be a good change. If not then we can consider revising the scale. I don’t have access to the individual votes of the Italian jury from previous editions so I can’t project how it might operate so I can only review it after each of the next couple of editions and then offer a review of how it seems to be working and what isn’t working.

Yes for 2 member juries and 3 member juries it will remain the same as a member's 12 point preference has always appeared in the combined votes so no real issue there. And thanks for your opinion, much appreciated. Would love to hear comments about user's preferred breakdown of voting and whether there is more value in rewarding a song liked by one jury member over a song liked by all but maybe not anyone's favourite. If there is enough discussion about it then supplementary questions can be added, but if it seems like users are happy to go ahead with this proposed format then we will implement that. So, discuss, vote, argue, let's hear from you all

A question regarding a potential rule change has been opened on the TISC Discussion thread here. Please take some time to read and cast your vote. Thanks

Totallympics International Song Contest: Rule Change Question On the TISC Annual 2020 thread, @Dunadan has brought up the idea of changing the internal voting format for multi-member juries as he feels the current system in large multi-member juries means that the preferences of one member can be completely wiped out by the combined voting. As such I thought it would be a worthwhile exercise to gauge the opinion of the wider TISC community on this issue. @Dunadan's idea is that for larger multi-member juries, each member of that jury would award points in the following format: 18-15-12-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 The reasoning offered is that one jury member's top preference would be awarded 18 points and would be more likely to appear at least somewhere in the top 12 of the overall combined jury votes. It is important to be clear here that this does not mean that a large multi-member jury will award more points than any other jury. The internal points will be combined as normal to create a set of points from 12 to 1, in the same way that all national juries will award their points. ******************** Question: In the case of multi-member juries with more than 3 jury members, should the internal voting of that jury be changed to allow each member of that jury to award points in the following format?: 18-15-12-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 (a) Yes, I agree with these changes (b) No, I do not agree to these changes I am particularly interested in getting the thoughts of the Italian jury members @Henry_Leon @SteveParker @Pablita @Gianlu33 and of course @Dunadan. However, as this potential change has implications for all juries in future, everyone is welcomed and indeed encouraged to cast their votes on this issue. We will put a deadline of Friday, 31st January 21:00 GMT for members to vote on this issue and whatever option receives the majority vote, the result of this poll will be implemented in time for the upcoming TISC Annual 2020 in Algeria and the rules will be edited accordingly. Only users who have participated in a previous TISC event are permitted to vote in this poll. In the case of a tie in the voting, the status quo will remain and we will re-visit the issue again in the next edition. Thank you for your attention @bestmen @konig @LDOG @KingOfTheRhinos @titicow @vinipereira @intoronto @Manulete @Function CR Lee @dcro @Agger @Wumo @thepharoah @Finnator123 @Bohemia @Benolympique @uk12points @Janakis @Vektor @Fly_like_a_don @Griff88 @Ruslan @Werloc @Glen @mrv86 @Ionoutz24 @heywoodu @Wanderer @Skijumpingmaster @rybak @kungshamra71 @IoNuTzZ @DaniSRB @hckosice @justony @Cobi @Belle @amen09 @tuniscof @dezbee2008 @Olympian1010 @stefanbg @Damian @catgamer @Quasit @Dolby @Monzanator @kungshamra71 @FC Mezhgorye @Jur @Memo @Argenis Gonzalez

I may return to reporting duties at some point but I can say it won’t be for winter sports which I know nothing about and rarely watch

1 star for Joker? Give me a break :d

Just in the middle of watching the 2-hour premier of HBO's adaptation of Stephen King's "The Outsider" on Sky Atlantic. I am really liking this so far. Did you get a chance to catch this @Olympian1010 ?

I understand. Well there is no harm to allow a discussion on this. One idea could be that as the national jury adds more members, the internal voting structure changes accordingly. 1 and 2 member juries could have the standard format, 3 and 4 member juries could have a slight change and 5+ member juries could have an additional change.

I guess we could explore this option though and allowing a public vote on the matter. Maybe national juries should decide themselves the system of distributing their points. Though I personally love the system currently and it has resulted in the unique situation where Italy (always a big multi-member jury) has always found the overall winner in its set of votes. It kind of shows that it is a good way of finding the overall taste.

Yes, I see now. I thought initially he meant that multi-juries should award more points.. It's rare that a 12 point song from a jury member would receive nothing in the overall vote (it happened I think sometimes). But in the end, it's still the same for all members, their votes count as much as any other member.

Every jury must award equal points as it would be unfair for nations with multi-juries if they have to award more points to other countries whilst receiving 0 themselves.

@Sindo Rory McIlroy will represent Ireland at the Olympics and not GB. His medal here needs to be attributed to Ireland and not GB.

Oh come on, we all know the number 1 terrorist is Putin and the big bad Russia. Duh.

America, proving they are the terrorists of the world once again. How else to start a new decade

Yes, format should not matter, at least not a whole lot. I love the idea of having the results available here as it will be useful for me personally. I used to contribute when I could on the old forum but I don't have time to spend on adhering to strict formats, and I view my free time as more precious these days. But I am definitely all for this idea even if I cannot contribute myself

I think Sindo said it was to preserve those results in case they ever disappear from those sites, and they would be easy to find here.

Wright!!!! WORLD CHAMPION 2020!!

6-3!!!