GTP Cool Wall: 1994 McLaren F1

[Tornado]

That just sounds an awful lot to me like the stupid math formula system should be thrown out if the idea to repoll is coming up just because the car didn't rank arbitrarily high enough when it was calculated

 

[AnthonyD1993]

Repolling everything would take up a ton of time that would impede other cars from being polled. There is no point in repolling anything.

 

[Jahgee]

I feel like these two statements need to be made, some people are getting the wrong idea by me suggesting a repoll

• THIS CAR WON'T BE REPOLLED WHILE I AM CURATOR - Got it, this poll is done, I'm not going to make another poll for a car just because I don't like where it ended up.
• EVEN WITH REPLACING ONE DAY'S POST WITH A REPOLL EVERY DAY, I STILL WOULD BE POSTING THREADS AS OFTEN THAN ANY OTHER CURATOR - So no, this wouldn't slow down the rate of new polls being done to any slower than any time before now
• REPOLL'S WOULD ONLY BE CONSIDERED ON CARS POLLED BEFORE @BKGLOVER - So it would only be cars where the polling population is significantly different

 

[Roger the Horse]

As far as I can see, there is overwhelming opposition to repolling (for reasons already stated). This might change, but for now, there shouldn't be any repolling.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

While I can understand the argument that the population has changed a lot in the years since this started, that's a moot point; it's always changing.

A lot of people might've disagreed with W&N's opinions on cars - or how quickly he got threads up - but he never threatened to invalidate members' votes or repoll based on unsatisfactory results.

 

[Famine]

I feel like these two statements need to be made, some people are getting the wrong idea by me suggesting a repoll

• THIS CAR WON'T BE REPOLLED WHILE I AM CURATOR - Got it, this poll is done, I'm not going to make another poll for a car just because I don't like where it ended up.
• EVEN WITH REPLACING ONE DAY'S POST WITH A REPOLL EVERY DAY, I STILL WOULD BE POSTING THREADS AS OFTEN THAN ANY OTHER CURATOR - So no, this wouldn't slow down the rate of new polls being done to any slower than any time before now
• REPOLL'S WOULD ONLY BE CONSIDERED ON CARS POLLED BEFORE @BKGLOVER - So it would only be cars where the polling population is significantly different

I feel like there's only one statement to be made, and you got the wrong idea by me posting the word "thanks" after it originally.


"No."

 

[OriginalCheezIt]

What if, instead of the new poll replacing the old one outright, we averaged them together based on how many people voted in each? For instance, say the 300SLR Uhlenhaut were to be repolled. If 75 total people had voted in the first one, and 225 voted in the new one, then the poll results would consist of a 3:1 ratio of new to old (75% new poll, 25% old). It would essentially be as though 300 people voted on it.

Hell, even a plain ol' 50/50 average.

Because there are discrepancies in several of the ratings, like how the "meh" option was added later. We can't assume that those cars wouldn't have gotten 0 meh votes.

 

[AnthonyD1993]

The cars were voted on and the results were accepted as such. It's done and over with. Let the results be since they are what they are.

 

[ildd]

We need to repoll all the cars from the 2010 polls.

 

[Jahgee]

While I can understand the argument that the population has changed a lot in the years since this started, that's a moot point; it's always changing.

Directed at this post - A lot of people might've disagreed with W&N's opinions on cars - or how quickly he got threads up - but he never threatened to invalidate members' votes or repoll based on unsatisfactory results.

1. I'm not gonna deny that threatening to invalidate votes crossed a line, but it ended an argument that should have never taken place in my opinion.
2. As I said above, this thread is not even being considered for repolling, only threads made prior to BKGlover's revival are.

Directed to the population in general - I can see where some people would think that repolling would slow nominations. However, the previous curators followed the previous nomination posting frequencies

boiltheocean - 1 every 2 days
Joey D - 1 every day
Tornado - 1 every 2 or 3 days
TheBook - 1 every week
BKGlover - 2 every week
White & Nerdy - 1 every 2 days
Jahgee1124 Currently - 2 every day
Jahgee1124 Proposed - 1 every day with 1 repoll daily

 

[Panoz]

The first 4 sentences in the Cool Wall results says it all.

The Cool Wall has change and grown much like GTP itself. Do we want this subject to pop up again in 5 years time to poll everything once again. I don't see no problems at all with the polling, many members come and go.

If there is nothing broke, don't fix it.

 

[Famine]

repolling ... repolling ... repoll

There's a message not getting through here and I can't for the life of me explain why.

NO.

 

[Tornado]

Except I don't want the cars voted for when I ran the wall voted for again, certainly not with a change to the voting system I have disagreed with since it was introduced after I handed the wall off.

 

[Wiegert]

Funny how this issue only seems to pop up after each failed attempt to top the results list.

I don't think it can be stressed enough even after all the previous objections to the idea, but there is absolutely no point in undoing years of poll results, whether it's because the current rules are different than they were when the Cool Wall began, or as a way to increase the chances of another car beating the Miura (I know some of you in favour of re-polling nominate cars with the sole intention of topping the table. It's been made quite clear in past threads). Especially when this same idea will no doubt be tossed around again in a few years with the same "bigger polling sample" excuse.

 

[Leggy1]

@Jahgee1124 So what are the reasons for re-polling?

As mentioned earlier, the number of people voting now is much different to what it was in the early stages. But it will always be changing, it cannot be avoided.

• REPOLL'S WOULD ONLY BE CONSIDERED ON CARS POLLED BEFORE @BKGLOVER

So only for votes with significantly different voter population? As said before, all are different.

However, other members and I are getting the impression that you don't agree with the results of this poll, that being the reason for a re-poll.

You should not issue re-polls in an attempt to get your desired result. That is disrespecting the result of the people that vote against your opinion.

You are the head of the Cool Wall, you put in plenty of work to get the results from a large group of people. You have to accept the result of the votes, you have to be fair in this role.

The people have spoken.

Accept it.

 

[Jahgee]

@Jahgee1124 So what are the reasons for re-polling?

As mentioned earlier, the number of people voting now is much different to what it was in the early stages. But it will always be changing, it cannot be avoided.

So only for votes with significantly different voter population? As said before, all are different.

However, other members and I are getting the impression that you don't agree with the results of this poll, that being the reason for a re-poll.

You should not issue re-polls in an attempt to get your desired result. That is disrespecting the result of the people that vote against your opinion.

You are the head of the Cool Wall, you put in plenty of work to get the results from a large group of people. You have to accept the result of the votes, you have to be fair in this role.

The people have spoken.

Accept it.

• The reasons for repolling are that the voting population is significantly different now than it was before, out of the 199 voters in this thread, only 28 voted in the last poll held by TheBook, 4 of which being either site staff or previous curators.
• This is true
• Only for polls that are over 2 years old. I've heard before that 1 year is equivalent to 10 internet years, peoples opinions often change over a time of "20" years
• This poll is not where the idea for a repoll came from, read posts 889-893 of the Nominations thread, where I first made public my views on repolling
• I didn't intend to, as I said in the posts I linked to, I've kept my idea consistent, repoll everything pre-BKGlover
• I am accepting the results in threads that I posted and the "large group of people" is similar enough poll to poll
• They have, I've not seen a significant majority either for or against repolling, however only those against seem to be constantly vocal about it

Don't take this post personally, I'm not attacking you, I'm just answering your points with my viewpoints in an attempt to make my views publicly known so as to not allow speculation about them

 

[OriginalCheezIt]

*cough cough* There's a pretty solid solution to this problem right underneath Famine's post. Keeps both polls valid, and will account for population differences and the lack of "meh" in older polls. Just sayin'.

 

[Jahgee]

*cough cough* There's a pretty solid solution to this problem right underneath Famine's post. Keeps both polls valid, and will account for population differences and the lack of "meh" in older polls. Just sayin'.

Don't worry, I've seen and taken into account every post in this thread regarding how I'm running this.

 

[MrUnknown]

If a part of these cars get repolled, it will be an utter disaster...

... Just no.

 

[Roger the Horse]

@Jahgee1124, when the site's administrator is telling you that you can't do something in enlarged capital letters, that means that you can't do it, at least here.

 

[Liquid]

Indeed. While this might be Jahgee's project, he is not a moderator and cannot implement such changes just like that. Three members of the site staff have spoken (daan, Famine and SlipZtrEm).

@Tornado Could you remind me of the old method of tallying results? I'm not too keen on the percentile method or having more than just "SU, U, C, SZ" as results categories myself.

 

[Leggy1]

@Jahgee1124 Thanks for providing clear reasons. Though I am still not in favour.

As Roger and Liquid have said, staff members do not agree with you. Famine had clearly said no to re-polling a few times. So that means no to you, you aren't a moderator or staff member.

 

[Zenith]

Nobody cares about where cars are rated.

The GTP Cool Wall is about discussion. Of course it's going to have issues with consistency as the site grows. So what?

 

[Tornado]

@Tornado Could you remind me of the old method of tallying results? I'm not too keen on the percentile method or having more than just "SU, U, C, SZ" as results categories myself.

The one with the most votes won. That's it. Percentiles only came into effect in the event of a tie, which is not something that I can recall actually happening anyway. Cars went into the icebox if they had a certain amount (I think 75 or 80%) of sub zero votes and no seriously uncool ones.



The pre-formula polls were adjusted to fit the math system BKGlover did, but obviously none of those hundred+ polls suffered from being polled under the Meh Wall.

 

[Crash]

To add to this, opinions of something will inevitably change given a long enough time. If there are re-votes, why set the time limit to those polls voted on before a certain year? Do we re-vote things that are 3 years old? 2 years old? 1 year old? 6 months old? Who gets to make that arbitrary decision? How is a "different enough voter base" even defined anyways?

A vote is a vote, and should be settled there and then. There were people that didn't get the chance to vote in elections because they weren't eligible then; should every single election ever be re-voted every couple of years, and old results be nullified then?

And with the sample sizes being what they were and are (read: large enough), and with the similarities in polling population characteristics, frankly, I think people are overestimating how much different re-vote results will end up being.

 

[Dennisch]

When I am an official US citizen I want to vote for Mccain.

 

[Roger the Horse]

Can we not change the formula. Keep it as it is now, there's nothing wrong with it.

As has already been said, the real point is discussion. If everything averages out towards the centre, that's probably because most things are somewhat average.

Would I prefer it if the "meh" option wasn't there? Yes. Would I ever consider changing it so it wasn't there a good idea? No. It is how it is now.

I know one could accuse me of being a hypocrite for adding an "abstain" option to the Alt Cool Wall polls (which I already explained my reasoning for elsewhere.), but that doesn't actually change the formula. People had the right to abstain from voting in the past, and they still can now, but if you are Didi from Dexter's Laboratory you can now press a button to declare it. (I'll probably drop it anyway, I just wanted to gauge how it goes while the Alt Wall is still young.)

Anyway, let's try to keep the cool wall how it is. Changing it more will just lead to more arguing.

 

[AudiMan2011]

There shouldn't be any re-polls for any cars. Ever. Whether it's from before 2010, the results are as they are and shouldn't be changed after voting has finished regardless of changes in the voter base. The Cool Wall has been pretty concrete up until this point so why change what isn't broken?

Changing the results for one car just because a few people disagreed with the majority of other votes is just completely ludicrous.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

The one with the most votes won. That's it. Percentiles only came into effect in the event of a tie, which is not something that I can recall actually happening anyway. Cars went into the icebox if they had a certain amount (I think 75 or 80%) of sub zero votes and no seriously uncool ones.

I vote this voting system SZ.

 

[Doodle]

I feel like this argument has only come up simply because of it not reaching "Steve McQueen's Garage". Why don't we just simply remove that section entirely?