Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
Lynx-lynx, insisting that voters have read both could end up with very few votes being cast. These are not exactly books that tend attract the same sort of readers (yes, I know some of us are omnivores, but that doesn't apply to everyone).
Of course the (lack of) relevance of such votes when you haven't met all the candidates becomes all the more blatant when there are just two, but really it's no different from when there were twenty (or whatever).
|
gmw, yeah I know it's way too farcical to consider that only people who have read both books should be able to vote, but that's the only possible way a 'clear' outcome can be identified in my opinion. (And as we can't see the names of those who voted, there may be members who vote in this poll who didn't vote in the previous poll - again farcical
)
However -
Quote:
|
(... snip) ....... But then I'm not that concerned about absolute here, I don't think any run-off votes are needed, not even with the three-way tie. Having a top-dog (how many metaphors am I up to?) in this seems a bit pointless.
|
This I agree with - why strive for an absolute outcome when in order to vote in the first place there was not an absolute requirement to have read all the entries.
But, I'm not sure if Paul may have stated in the 'Rules' that a run off would occur if there was a tie .....
