foobarbaz wrote:

---

JonH comes home wrote:

---

foobarbaz wrote:

---

JonH comes home wrote:

---

steven wrote:

---

The ones with more than 10% are the four I considered voting for before deciding. As usual, it's very difficult when we're not really comparing like with like (singles with doubles, seniors with juniors, singles with doubles, etc).

---

 It is always difficult , and men v women as well! But to be honest, its hard enough doing it as one vote in terms of the process , let alone lots of little sub votes! It may be hard but it works, I think! 

ps have you voted !

---

Agree, it's good having all the categories mixed in. One thing I wonder whether might be useful, is if everyone is granted 2 votes (for different choices) would it keep the result in the balance for longer, plus there would be fewer "nil point" candidates. Not sure if the mechanics are doable though?

---

 Hi Foobarbaz (Baz?). Yeah, sadly the voting system just allows for one vote per person, as far as I can tell. Ive played around with having rounds of voting to whittle it down to a final few, but it required more work from me and, frankly, the semis only ended up getting us to a final we could all predict anyway! Ive

tried one big vote and then a final 2, but the final 2 ended up a damp squib. 

still, by and large it works I think. Definitely categories mixed works best and is easier for me. 

player of season vote in early December though will be wide open this year and for that I do plan to have three rounds of voting. I anticipate maybe 25-30 players in it (im predicting 27 currently) and so it maybe something like 3 groups of 9, whittled down to semis of 6 and then a final of 4. player of season is usually quite open in most of the group votes apart from last season, Emma sort of dominated it! Haha. 

thanks for your support . 

---

 Yeah, I thought that there might be a single vote limit in the system. The kind of thing I envisaged was there would be two views of the single poll side by side at the top of the page. Neither would show the current standings until the person makes their first vote (on the left-hand poll view), at which point the left hand view shows the current standings. The right hand view remains in readiness, waiting for the person to vote a second time, the only difference is the de-activated radio-button next to the candidate chosen with the first vote. There would be no requirement for the person to make the second vote immediately, it could be done sometime later, or even not all. So the persons 2nd vote would be made with full knowledge of the current standings and would just add to the same poll, and might therefore allow for some tactical voting, or one candidate to make a late run for the title perhaps. It was just a thought, and not a criticism of the current setup, which I think is great.

---

 It sounds grand - memo to whoever runs the active board systems !

Notched up to 34 votes, 10 hours left. Maths too hard in my head to calculate votes at this stage! 34 isnt a good number for mental percentages to be worked out, so lets get 35 and 36 please folks !

Around 6 left, just over, seem to be holding firm on 34 votes.

Closes at 6.40, anyone else wanting to vote, theres a small window left!

We are stuck on 34 , Johnny boy! We average 35 so maybe we are at a natural number where that is where we will typically land . Whicg is fine ! But

36 votes now in folks. Just over two hours to go now. Can Emily hold off Katie?

JonH comes home wrote:

---

Emily 10
Katie 7
Julian and Henry 5
Arthur 4
Oli, Lily and Jan 3

Hour and a half left

---

 ... and Ms Paskauskas 1

Time for a late run.