On Oct 20, 11:27 pm, weheh <richard_gor...@verizon.net> wrote: > Isn't the voting going to be done such that votes for clone designs > will be aggregated? If so, artificially directing people to vote for > one of the designs might, in fact, skew the results and rob you of > useful information that might be used to improve the final pick. I > think it's best right now to let the voting take place without a lot > of hoopla. And anyway, in the end, it's Massimo's choice.
I have not seen any statement indicating that votes for clone designs will be aggregated (it was suggested -- I think by you -- but no official word on whether it will happen). In any case, who decides what counts as a clone design? For example, two of the #5 variants have snake heads, one has wings, and one includes the former "bat" logo -- they all have the same base logo, but they may not all be strictly considered clones (in other words, some people who voted for some of these variants may not want their vote lumped in with the other variants). For example, let's say I voted for #36, but I really don't like #5 -- if you count #36 as a clone of #5, then my vote for #36 may ultimately end up helping #5 win, which is contrary to my preference. The way to handle clones is with approval voting or one of the other methods already discussed, not with post hoc aggregation by the vote administrator. Of course, if Massimo will ultimately make the final call and will simply use the vote tally as an input to his decision, then I agree that all this voting strategy is less important -- he'll be able to see the full distribution of votes and make a reasonable judgment. But again, it hasn't been made clear whether that will happen or whether we simply plan to go with whichever logo wins the vote. Anthony
