Vote for MobileRead's best fiction book of 1901-1910

[gmw]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

[...] As to the end result being 'meaningless', I refer to trying to decipher the outcome of a poll where not all books had to be read as a prerequisite to voting ..... so statistically, interpreting the votes can't be tested unless you know how many books each voter had read. (Well, I'm numerically illiterate but that's my take on it)

It goes further than that. Ultimately, the end result is meaningless for a compounding series of reasons: Not everyone that voted has read all the books nominated (they might have only read one of them); not everyone that chose to nominate books has read a significant proportion of the books published for the decade (so how do they know there aren't better books out there waiting); the voters are drawn from a fairly specialised group of readers; the number of votes (particularly considering the number of nominations) makes the results statistically insignificant.

But all of that works on the assumption that a "best" book exists. This may be true personally/individually (although many, I suspect based on my own troubles, found themselves hard pressed to choose just one book from a decade), but I think we can all accept that there can be no absolutes in this. Hell, my preferences change depending on my mood at the time.

And that's why, like you, I was disappointed to see the votes go from open to closed; much of the potentially useful detail of the vote was lost. So, like you, the main remaining benefit for me is to have a set of books that are worth taking a closer look at in the future.

[Thomas Clark]

I think I would prefer the The Hound of the Baskervilles by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.