Greg M. Johnson wrote:

> In my voting, I've also found myself thinking, "I don't care how good
> this one is; I don't think it should win," or, "I don't want to lose to
> THIS entry." Is this contrary to the spirit of the IRTC?  For example, I
> thought I'd much rather lose to 'Pool Shark' than 'Canyon', and so gave
> 'Pool Shark' near 20-20-20's. I suppose this philosophy could be taken
> to an unethical extreme, in giving everyone else's entry a 1-1-1. I'm
> certainly not doing that.

I find this very discouraging, as by so doing you are unfairly weighting your
vote.  I will struggle on choosing a correct distribution of points,
but by tossing around 20's, you thus make my votes, in which contestants
differ by a few points, of trivial relative significance.

Votes need to justify themselves.  If A scores higher than B in category
C, it is because A is better than B in C, not because one had
a generally good feeling for A overall.  Was Pool Shark an all-time
ground-breaking masterpiece in all three areas?  If so, the 20-20-20 is
justified.  But please don't "stuff the ballot box" to assert your own
general preference, indepent of the point categorization system.

Dan

Post a reply to this message