The LWMD - Discussion Thread Part Greg Adams

Tryamkin

Registered User
May 18, 2015
8,273
4,530
Canada
Were already voting on the vote.....


(not trying to single you out)

I'm saying he should let everyone know the team's names (ie: Chicago, Anahiem, Winnipeg) and let everyone vote on who should go on based on best team. Not based on who voted for or on what
 

VanillaCoke

Registered User
Oct 30, 2013
25,441
11,905
I'm saying he should let everyone know the team's names (ie: Chicago, Anahiem, Winnipeg) and let everyone vote on who should go on based on best team. Not based on who voted for or on what


We did that with our initial votes. Seems rather redundant to do it again.
Resolving a tie is the obstacle and A,B,C keeps it impartial.


Edit. Anyway I'll wait and see what sedinary thinks.
 

DanCloutiers5hole

Registered User
May 15, 2012
794
350
Van City
Personally i think you should remove personal votes then count remaining votes. If still tied most 1st place votes , if still tied most 2nd etc etc
 

Captain Bowie

Registered User
Jan 18, 2012
27,139
4,414
Looks like Team C is the choice. By several accounts they come out on top (taking away personal votes, only one to get a first vote from another manager, ect..)

So Team C it is. I will post the results shortly.
 

Ainec

Panetta was not racist
Jun 20, 2009
21,784
6,429
I think for polling it would be best to go by seed #s in title and team names within

Not going to get a lot of clicks with Arizona vs Dallas for example compared to Toronto vs Montreal
 

Vankiller Whale

Fire Benning
May 12, 2012
28,802
16
Toronto
I think for polling it would be best to go by seed #s in title and team names within

Not going to get a lot of clicks with Arizona vs Dallas for example compared to Toronto vs Montreal

I think we're avoiding team names altogether so that people aren't biased for/against a team based on that
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad