Congrajulations Tsoprano!

winning2007 · 01-03-09, 04:18 AM

Tsoprano 37

fearless · 01-03-09, 04:22 AM

Originally posted by winning2007

Tsoprano 37

You're 119th winning!

winning2007 · 01-03-09, 04:23 AM

Originally posted by fearless

You're 119th winning!

fearless · 01-03-09, 04:23 AM

I'm only 113th.

fearless · 01-03-09, 04:24 AM

Originally posted by winning2007

Check it here:

Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos

http://www.geocities.com/standings2009/Book2.htm

Latest news coverage, email, free stock quotes, live scores and video are just the beginning. Discover more every day at Yahoo!

winning2007 · 01-03-09, 04:25 AM

Originally posted by fearless

I'm only 113th.

fearless · 01-03-09, 04:25 AM

Look at sportsgirl...

Many said she didn't belong in the poll at all and here she is in the top 21!

fearless · 01-03-09, 04:26 AM

Originally posted by winning2007

What's

for?

winning2007 · 01-03-09, 04:28 AM

Originally posted by fearless

What's

for?

for fun

InTheHole · 01-03-09, 04:30 AM

Nice thing you did here for the forum. Keep up the good work!

fearless · 01-03-09, 04:33 AM

Originally posted by InTheHole

Nice thing you did here for the forum. Keep up the good work!

Thanks. I'm enjoying it. It's really fun to see surprises like Tsoprano in first and sportsgirl in the top 21! Fun stuff.

rm18 · 01-03-09, 05:00 AM

didn't make the ballot

gm2022 · 01-03-09, 05:04 AM

Originally posted by rm18

didn't make the ballot

some are meant to be,

you and I sir arent so

to the % of us who arent worthy

VegasDave · 01-03-09, 05:09 AM

Wow, tied for 2nd, thanks SBR!

fearless · 01-03-09, 05:17 AM

Originally posted by gm2022

some are meant to be,

you and I sir arent so

to the % of us who arent worthy

You're in group G.

frostno98 · 01-03-09, 05:34 AM

Uh, who really give a flying fvck about who's the top poster is here. The guy either contributes meaningful insight on sports or not.

slacker00 · 01-03-09, 06:01 AM

Originally posted by rm18

didn't make the ballot

I'd have voted for ya, rm18.

I didn't make it either, that I saw. I'm fine with that.

Was raiders anywhere in there? We can't have one of these polls without raiders.

fearless · 01-03-09, 06:53 AM

Originally posted by slacker00

I'd have voted for ya, rm18.

I didn't make it either, that I saw. I'm fine with that.

Was raiders anywhere in there? We can't have one of these polls without raiders.

He's in group G.

slacker00 · 01-03-09, 07:25 AM

Originally posted by fearless

He's in group G.

Thanks. I found him. I guess I'd only voted in A-D. I totally missed these other groups.

Say what you will about raiders, but he is the straw that stirs the drink around here sometimes. He's legendary, really, but I don't see him around so much anymore. The newer posters probably missed the classic old days when raiders really tore this place up.

fearless · 01-03-09, 07:49 AM

I've decided that the top 63 will move on to the final round.

Everyone who wants to vote in the final polls must have a minimum of 200 posts.

slacker00 · 01-03-09, 08:56 AM

Originally posted by fearless

I've decided that the top 63 will move on to the final round.

Everyone who wants to vote in the final polls must have a minimum of 200 posts.

Good idea. Gotta give respect to the posters who've made a minimum contribution to the forum.

fearless · 01-03-09, 09:02 AM

Originally posted by slacker00

Good idea. Gotta give respect to the posters who've made a minimum contribution to the forum.

That's important but the main thing is that it should virtually eliminate cheating. Not too many ghost accounts have 200 posts.

Also, how will I administer this? I'll choose the option that allows everyone to see everyone else's votes. Then I'll have to check each voter to make sure they have at least 200 votes. Anyone who votes with less than 200 votes will have their votes subtracted from the vote totals. It's a lot of work but if we're gonna do this it needs to be done right.

pavyracer · 01-03-09, 10:21 AM

Just my 2 cents: jjgold has 50 ghost accounts with more than 200 posts.

fearless · 01-03-09, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by pavyracer

Just my 2 cents: jjgold has 50 ghost accounts with more than 200 posts.

What do we raise the limit to? 300, 500?

Anything within reason is fine with me because someone who hasn't been posting enough probably isn't a good judge of who the poster of the year is.

How does a 500 limit sound?

pavyracer · 01-03-09, 10:28 AM

No ban paid posters or employees from voting.

fearless · 01-03-09, 10:31 AM

Originally posted by pavyracer

No ban paid posters or employees from voting.

How do I enforce that?

Also, we need a limit on the number of posts to try to eliminate cheating. I'm thinking 300-500 is adaquate.

pavyracer · 01-03-09, 10:36 AM

SBR can work out with you and identify the paid posters and their aliases. I'm pretty sure if you ask Willie Bee he will tell you who they are. 500 looks fine with me. Vikings2 has 20 posts in 20 months here and I'm pretty sure is a heck of a guy but does his vote have the same weight as diogee with 12,000 posts in 12 months?

fearless · 01-03-09, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by pavyracer

SBR can work out with you and identify the paid posters and their aliases. I'm pretty sure if you ask Willie Bee he will tell you who they are. 500 looks fine with me. Vikings2 has 20 posts in 20 months here and I'm pretty sure is a heck of a guy but does his vote have the same weight as diogee with 12,000 posts in 12 months?

We can go with 500 posts as a limit. I'm not sure about your thinking though. Why should we keep out paid posters and employees?

I mean, everybody in the government gets a vote just like everybody else. Isn't that part of a democtic system?

The 500 post rule should keep out aliases, imho.

pavyracer · 01-03-09, 10:49 AM

Well maybe you should do it like House of Represantives is voted. The state of Vermont doesn't have the same amount of Reps like California. Maybe the post count number of each voter should be multiplied by a coefficient depending how many posts he/she has and then you get a weighted average.

eg. 500 posts is 1 vote X 0.5 = 0.5
5000 posts is 1 vote X 5 = 5

etc

fearless · 01-03-09, 10:53 AM

Originally posted by pavyracer

Well maybe you should do it like House of Represantives is voted. The state of Vermont doesn't have the same amount of Reps like California. Maybe the post count number of each voter should be multiplied by a coefficient depending how many posts he/she has and then you get a weighted average.

eg. 500 posts is 1 vote X 0.5 = 0.5
5000 posts is 1 vote X 5 = 5

etc

Nice idea but easier said then done. There's no way I'm putting that much time into this.

Also, that would mean that if a particular poster happens to have friends that have lots of posts, it gives them an unfair advantage.

That's logistically impossible for me, I appreciate the idea though.

pavyracer · 01-03-09, 10:59 AM

Yeah but if a poster has lots of friends with ghosts with low number of posts it also gives them an unfair advantage.

Anyway no matter how you organize it has flows and I'm pretty sure some people will cheat. Just look at who wins all the contests here involving money. Either a professional service (I have proof), or people that pay money to get picks from professional services. Some of the winners have less than 100 posts. You hardly ever see a winner in sport contests with more than 5,000 posts.

Good luck. It is a brilliant idea what you do. Keep up the good work.

Bread · 01-03-09, 11:08 AM

Originally posted by VegasDave

Wow, tied for 2nd, thanks SBR!

Oh...NOW you are enjoying the poll Vegas Dave??

pavyracer · 01-03-09, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by Bread

Oh...NOW you are enjoying the poll Vegas Dave??

I missed this.

fearless · 01-03-09, 11:13 AM

Originally posted by pavyracer

Yeah but if a poster has lots of friends with ghosts with low number of posts it also gives them an unfair advantage.

Anyway no matter how you organize it has flows and I'm pretty sure some people will cheat. Just look at who wins all the contests here involving money. Either a professional service (I have proof), or people that pay money to get picks from professional services. Some of the winners have less than 100 posts. You hardly ever see a winner in sport contests with more than 5,000 posts.

Good luck. It is a brilliant idea what you do. Keep up the good work.

Thanks. Are you talking about CavsTime09?