cycling4freaks.com

You have until 15. November to vote for your preferred tour.

Link to the tours:

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=902

lesossies wrote:I fixed some rules for the design and the vote of the December Tour.

Vote:
1st vote from 1.-15. Nov.

if the best placed after the 1st vote doesn´t have a clear majotity,(10% majority : it means by 30 votes for the tour 3 more than the second one),
A second vote will occur from 15.-22. nov., if necessary, with the best placed tour designers who have at least 50%.of the winner votes (min. 15 by 30 votes for the 1st.).

And the ape says VOTE everybody.

Leso: How about putting a reminder that we're in the last days on top in the news again?

I complain

When you opened the first dec thread you wrote:

Vote:
1st vote from 1.-15. Nov.

if the best placed after the 1st vote doesn´t have a clear majotity,(10% majority : it means by 30 votes for the tour 3 more than the second one),
A second vote will occur from 15.-22. nov., if necessary, with the best placed tour designers who have at least 50%.of the winner votes (min. 15 by 30 votes for the 1st.).

Here we have 24, 24 and 14. But you only put the 24 in the second round. 14 is 58,3%, so has at least 50%, Should be in the vote.

I think it is a better solution.

The 2 selected tours have more than 50% of the votes and are in final.

I think it is fair and we get, by this solution, the absolutely most wanted tour.

I think it's absolutely not fair.

Because it's a different thing than what you announced. If you didn't announce anything, like last year? No problem. If you announced something different, no problem. Need 60% percent to be in the second round? Ok. Need 70%? Ok. But what you announced was:

If one tour has 90% or more of the tour with the most votes, then there will be a second round. All tours with 50% plus will participate in that.

According to your rules, all three should be in. Don't like the rule anymore? Change it for next year. But not in the middle of one election cycle. Is the new rule better? Don't know what it is, but if it's 60% +, yeah, why not, sounds almost better than 50% plus. But it's not the rule you announced.

Rules are important.
But we can be flexible too.
We have this time a very clear situation with 2 tours which domined clearly the vote.
The rules were spontan decided ... my fault.

I´ll change the rules for next year too (if I remember that).
The 10% solution was not good too, I ll probabily extend it to 20 or 25%.
(I was this time lucky that the two tours got the same number of votes, what have I done if the first had got 24 and the second 22 or 21 votes).

HOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU... Anti Leso decision

RSF leaves again the democracy rules to go to the "at the head of the guest" rules!

If you fix rules before the vote and then change it by arbitrariness, this is NOT okay. I will not participate at the Dec-Tour as protest to this decision!

Lizard wrote:If you fix rules before the vote and then change it by arbitrariness, this is NOT okay. I will not participate at the Dec-Tour as protest to this decision!

me too!!!!

Since Big Buddha won't change it, at least he should put the correct link in the game now...

As for the system. Agree that 10% is not really good either...pff, just ask the ape for a clever system, don't you know the ape knows everything?

7 day vote, Top 5 go to the second round, if 2 tied for 5th place, both go in, so 6, if it's more cut at nr 4 (if that one is tied to, max 7 or go to nr 3 for the cu)
7 day vote, Winner if 20% or at least 5 votes difference, otherwise all with 60% of the max vote getter get into round 3
7 day vote, Winner gets all, loser gets a virtual ice cream.


As for here... yeah, in the end very likely not much will change. BUT, how do we know some of the late Kurdistan votes weren't tactical votes for Brazil or South Africa? If I still had had my vote, when it was 23-21 (I think saw that once) I probably would have done a tactical Kurdistan vote to get South Africa in, to make it unlikely that Sheik wins in the first round so that my favorite still has a shot. (and then would have voted for Sheik in the second round unless LCB starts riding, wanted to blackmail him into riding, grr, you destroyed a clever monkey scheme) You have to expect tactical votes, after all we need to practice our tactics for the game all the time, can't leave tactics out of a vote... My guess is that the same tour will win that would have won anyway, probably even clearer than it would have been with South Africa in, but it's only a guess.. we don't really know. Should have put S.A. in. But well, won't boycott the tour of the vote because of that... but will complain!

Team Franconia wrote:

Lizard wrote:If you fix rules before the vote and then change it by arbitrariness, this is NOT okay. I will not participate at the Dec-Tour as protest to this decision!

me too!!!!

me too !
But VOTE KURDISTAN !

The rules were completely stupid and nobody noticed or discussed that.

Maybe only 1 rule is needed:
all tours who get 75 % and more of the first one come in the second vote. (3 votes are too much for me).

If it is possible, I would hide the results until the end of the vote to evit tactical votes, it is surely a problem too.