MobileRead November 2011 Mobile Read Book Club Vote

[GA Russell]

I definitely like the secret ballot.

In regard to discussion, I wouldn't mind people speaking positively about books they would like to read, but I was stung by the negative comments - Don't vote for this book or I didn't vote for that book. I feel that those negative comments insult the three people who nominated the book.

[WT Sharpe]

Maybe keep the blind vote, but allow anyone who wants to campaign to do so. Most of us realize that just because some people are more vocal in their opinion it doesn't follow that theirs is the majority opinion. I think we've all been around the block enough times to know that the squeakiest wheel isn't always backing the winner.

[jgaiser]

Originally Posted by GA Russell

I definitely like the secret ballot.

In regard to discussion, I wouldn't mind people speaking positively about books they would like to read, but I was stung by the negative comments - Don't vote for this book or I didn't vote for that book. I feel that those negative comments insult the three people who nominated the book.

I think that connecting an insult with negative comments is a bit too much. People have opinions (some more than others), and there may be good reasons to speak negatively about a book. Moderators are pretty willing to prevent true abuses. I personally like folks to give there thoughts, good or bad.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by issybird

There was nothing remotely unfair about the prior system. You may prefer this one, but it's no fairer. Can we grow up and avoid playground terminology? Especially when "fair" can be deconstructed to mean, "my choices never seem to win, so I want to try something else."

I think you missed the plot (as they say in the UK).

What happened now was that every book had votes. The votes were a lot closer. We didn't have any of the "choosing a book because the others didn't have enough votes". We've had people admit they voted because of the way the votes were going and not for what they really wanted. So yes, fair is the exact and correct word. This vote was fair. It was not railroaded by who voted for what or how many votes. This vote was FAIR.

I'm sorry you seem to think that everything I am in favor of has to have an ulterior motive. But that's just not so. It was just very obvious (if you'd take off your blinders) that the voting wasn't actually impartial. Once we had enough votes, we may as well have only had 1 or 2 books nominated. It didn't work. It wasn't what people wanted. They voted for what had a chance to win. That's not how it should have been.

[Nyssa]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Maybe keep the blind vote, but allow anyone who wants to campaign to do so. Most of us realize that just because some people are more vocal in their opinion it doesn't follow that theirs is the majority opinion. I think we've all been around the block enough times to know that the squeakiest wheel isn't always backing the winner.

That would work for me. There were a few people who weighed the pros and cons over the different choices, and I did like that.

I was right, however, that the discussion indicated that I should not have voted for my first choice. I didn't listen this time, but it could sway my vote next time, as my 2nd choice came in 2nd place and could have been first if not for that one vote.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Nyssa

I loved it. The anticipation was exciting. I also enjoyed those who were hinting around what they had chosen. Plus, like you said, the votes were much closer.

All that in mind, I wouldn't do a blind vote every month.

I would suggest using it a couple times during the year. Specifically January: Wild Card and August: Free For All (any genre), due to the random, surprise nature of those months anyway, as well as one of the two Classic months so that we can have one with and one without.

Sure we didn't have the campaigning. But we did have some fun discussion. Heck, I even got to make a countdown timer. The results were the closest they have been in a long time (if ever). So I do think the blind vote worked. It achieved the result of the winning book being the one more people wanted and not because other books had no hope in hell of winning.

[Nyssa]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I think you missed the plot (as they say in the UK).

What happened now was that every book had votes. The votes were a lot closer. We didn't have any of the "choosing a book because the others didn't have enough votes". We've had people admit they voted because of the way the votes were going and not for what they really wanted. So yes, fair is the exact and correct word. This vote was fair. It was not railroaded by who voted for what or how many votes. This vote was FAIR.

I'm sorry you seem to think that everything I am in favor of has to have an ulterior motive. But that's just not so. It was just very obvious (if you'd take off your blinders) that the voting wasn't actually impartial. Once we had enough votes, we may as well have only had 1 or 2 books nominated. It didn't work. It wasn't what people wanted. They voted for what had a chance to win. That's not how it should have been.

I agree with Jon, here. His use of the word "fair" equals "more accurate" or more specifically "less influenced". He does not mean "unjust".

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Sure we didn't have the campaigning. But we did have some fun discussion. Heck, I even got to make a countdown timer. The results were the closest they have been in a long time (if ever). So I do think the blind vote worked. It achieved the result of the winning book being the one more people wanted and not because other books had no hope in hell of winning.

I do not miss the campaigning per se, but, as others have stated (myself included) discussion of the various choices is fun.
To clarify, I prefer the "Here is why I think we will enjoy this book" posts over the "Hey vote for this not for that" posts.

[Kevin8or]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Did everyone like the hidden vote? I kind of missed the campaigning, but the results were much closer!

It was my first vote. :-P I liked it, though.

I don't suggest that the moderators actually undertake the labor of ranked-choice voting, but this is a situation in which an instant runoff voting (IRV) scheme shines. Many voters probably feel that their vote was wasted, but in an IRV system, second and third place votes are re-assigned as required to achieve a true majority.

IRV can yield surprising results. For example, Hyperion and Canticle could have lost, unless they had a sufficient number of second-choice votes in addition to the first-choice votes.

I don't think I'm explaining it well, and anyway, it's too much work for our volunteers to do manually. Trust me, though. It's a cool way to vote.

[sun surfer]

Obviously I'm happy about the selection this month , and I enjoyed the suspense of the hidden vote. At the same time, I also like the discussion during the open vote.

I've had a suggestion similar to Nyssa's for some days, but wanted to wait until the vote was over to bring it up:

We could alternate monthly from hidden to open. So, say, this year the odd months are hidden and the even months are open. The year after could be reversed (odd months open, even months hidden) so all monthly genres can equally have both types of votes.

I think that would be a compromise that is enjoyable to everyone, and simple.

[Spacechik]

So, being a new person, I only voted once. Can one vote 3 three tres times??? or for 3 choices? That makes no sense to me, but then to me it's silly to hide the votes. I vote for what I WANT to read...

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Spacechik

So, being a new person, I only voted once. Can one vote 3 three tres times??? or for 3 choices? That makes no sense to me, but then to me it's silly to hide the votes. I vote for what I WANT to read...

One can nominate or second/third up to a total of three times. But the vote is only once.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by Spacechik

So, being a new person, I only voted once. Can one vote 3 three tres times??? or for 3 choices? That makes no sense to me, but then to me it's silly to hide the votes. I vote for what I WANT to read...

You can only vote once in the voting poll for the Book Club selection.

In the Nominations thread, you have three votes. You can use them to nominate books, or to second or third someone else's nomination. A book needs three votes from different members to become fully nominated and make it into the voting poll.

[GA Russell]

Originally Posted by sun surfer

Obviously I'm happy about the selection this month , and I enjoyed the suspense of the hidden vote. At the same time, I also like the discussion during the open vote.

I've had a suggestion similar to Nyssa's for some days, but wanted to wait until the vote was over to bring it up:

We could alternate monthly from hidden to open. So, say, this year the odd months are hidden and the even months are open. The year after could be reversed (odd months open, even months hidden) so all monthly genres can equally have both types of votes.

I think that would be a compromise that is enjoyable to everyone, and simple.

I like sun surfer's suggestion!

[lila55]

Originally Posted by GA Russell

I definitely like the secret ballot.

So did I!
And Jon was right, the votes are much more spread out and I think the winners are actually the books the majority really wanted. In the open vote the early voters strongly influenced the votes of the people who came later. Surely nobody even then voted for a book he/she absolutely did not want to read, but it was not necessarily the # 1 favourit.

[Kevin8or]

Hidden vote + open discussion seems like a nice combination.