Subject:
|
Re: What makes a cool kid cool? (was: Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego.direct
|
Date:
|
Thu, 10 May 2001 13:57:00 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1095 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Tomas Clark writes:
> > that his/her model is only preferred by 6% of voters, I'm
> > afraid that it could send a hurtful message to the child [...]
>
> Here's a question -- is it better to keep the exact percentages of votes
> under wraps? And just announce winners and runners-up and honorable
> mentions, or something along those lines, instead of the "interactive" 6% /
> 15% / 43% kind of thing? I admit, however, that I tend to vote for the
> underdog, especially the wild "rainbow warrior" creations that are usually
> made by the younger kids.
While I do think some underdog voting would be lost by keeping the
percentages under wraps I think it on balance would be beneficial to do
that. As I said in an off-topic.debate post in response to one of Todd's, I
think the model of how Todd does CLSotW is great.
People can and should vote, but running tallies are not revealed, and
further, the final winner decision is editorial with the votes being one
input factor rather than it being a democratic process.
A side benefit is the lessening (but not total elimination, unfortunately)
of campaigns by those who want votes and of attempted fraud in the voting
process.
While we are talking about this, what is the prospect for improving the
screening process, or has that been done already? (I'm referring for the
tendency that it seems that every 2 or 3 months someone enters work that
clearly "came off the web" instead of out of their imagination).
Thanks!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
71 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
