fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3718 ]

[ SECRET POST #3718 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3718 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Criminal Minds, Stephen Walker]

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

[Death in Paradise, Humphrey/Florence]

__________________________________________________

05.

[The NeverEnding Story]

__________________________________________________

06.

[Beyoncé]

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 35 secrets from Secret Submission Post #531.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Why would you want a checkbox when there can only be one winner? Pick the book you want the most, and go for it. Check boxes would only lead to trying to game the votes to try to down vote something, and there is no need to do that.

Well, the current system already has strategic voting in it. It's not as bad this month, because there's nothing I absolutely hate, but I'd still like it if I could just go down and vote for the 5 books that I want to read instead of waiting around to see which of them actually has a chance at winning. And to be honest, I think that's much more impactful than strategic downvoting would be.

More broadly, I think the risk (of having to have runoff polls if there's a tie) is less than the benefit (allowing people to vote for as many books as they actually want to read instead of having to limit it to one).

So basically you are saying that if there is a book you don't want to read on the list, you'd like to be able to vote for every other book on the list in order to vote that first book down. That sounds rather selfish. If there is no book that shouts out to you, then just sit that poll out. Better yet, nominate a book you like and vote for that book, instead of trying to vote other books down. At the end of the day though, part of the fun of a book club is to buy and read books you usually wouldn't. So reading a book you wouldn't usually like is a feature, not a bug.

I vote for the choice that is most likely to result in us reading something that I want to read. If there's nothing I want to read, or my vote's not going to make a difference, I will sit that round out or throw away my vote. But when I'm choosing between Book A (which I hate with the passion of a thousand suns, and I think will lead to a horrible discussion, and for some reason has 34 votes) and Book B (which is fine and I think will lead to a fine discussion and wouldn't mind reading, and which has 33 votes) and Book C (which I really want to read but which has literally 0 votes), yes, I'm going to vote for Book B, because it's something that I'll be able to enjoy reading at least. And that's frequently what happens when I do nominate my own books, for the record.

Whereas if there were checkbox voting, I would just vote for books B and C and be fine. Which I think would be better.

Of course it's not the end of the world either way and if people disagree that's fine. I just wanted to mention it.

That defeats the entire idea of a bookclub though. Just vote honestly for the book you'd like to see read and discussed and leave it at that. No railroading.

NAYRT, but you seem to have a really weird concept of book clubs. People don't join book clubs to read books they hate. They join to ~~drink wine~~ discuss books with other people who enjoy reading. Most of them have a theme of some kind, which we don't, so even if the book that month isn't something they'd choose to read on their own, it's tied into something that they're interested in. Also, AYRT isn't trying to railroad. If anything, they're trying to gerrymander.

NAYRT

What? How?

My voting process is similar to the anon above. The books I want to read the most tend to do badly in the polls, different tastes and all, all fine. So I just vote for the book I may want to read less, but still want to read. Why would I 'waste' my vote on a book that has no chance of winning, when another one I would also like to read might actually win the poll?

I'm all for discovering new things and going out of your comfort zone, but I'm not going to read and/or pay for books, where the synopsis already tells me it's going to be garbage (for me personally, obviously).

That's like, the fifth rule of Book Club, right?

Since when is strategic voting bad? I'm not being facetious, I honestly don't understand your point.

Strategic voting isn't my main point - it doesn't bother me that much, anyway. I was responding to anon's argument about strategic voting. My point is that I think being able to vote for as many things as you want, instead of worrying about what the most likely winner is, would be better. If everyone else disagrees of course I accept that.

OK, I think I understand a little better now.

However, I don't really see how that would change the result in any significant way. I mean, if we had the rule that we would read the books in second, third etc. place later, then it would make more sense. But as it is, Nightwatch would still be in the lead and the most likely winner. The number of votes for every book might be higher, but I don't think the proportion would change.

Or rather, what would you hope to gain by changing the way the poll works?

...ok, honest question. When I look at the poll page before voting I am not able to see which books are in the lead. Am I missing something here? The idea is for everyone to cast a vote without knowing what everyone else is voting for.

If you click the little text that says "See Results" next to the VOTE button, it lets you see the results, and then you can go back and vote

lmao I never even tried doing that.

I guess it didn't occur to me that people would ~vote strategically~

I just figured everyone would put in one vote for what they wanted

I think I give people (in general) too much credit. I mean...I guess it's not a bad thing per se but I was trying to keep it simple...

Were we supposed to vote blind? That's news to me. Oops.

I just didn't even realize there was an option to see results, as I've never looked for one. Blind voting would be my preference, but it didn't occur to me that that's not what was going on lol

I'll have to talk about how the group as a whole would prefer to do it. We can switch to a multi-voting system or whatever, I don't care as long as nobody cheats and people are happy with it.

OP

Thinking about it more, I kind of suspect that actually trying to talk through a change like this is going to be a ton of effort relative to the actual benefits that would come from it. So please don't sweat it! It's not a major problem by any means - just something that I was thinking of and thought that I would mention.

No worries! I'll see what everyone thinks. Maybe we won't change anything.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #3718 ]

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll

Re: Book club - April poll