AK-SAR-BEN - tomskilv wrote:
> Looking at the list I could see 10+ deserving persons to be in the hall of
> fame. Yet it would be hard for one person out of 20 to get 33% of the vote ...
I posted my response (appended below) to similar points
that were raised by Bob Dancer.
I'll add to my response by stating that I believe that the cream
always rises to the top, and as some of the cream is removed,
there is less remaining cream (if there is any at all) to
consider.
As an example:
TomSki received 57.0% of the vote in the 2008 election
TomSki received 23.2% of the vote in the 2007 election
TomSki received 21.8% of the vote in the 2006 election
TomSki received 20.7%% of the vote in the 2005 election
TomSki received 17.9%% of the vote in the 2004 election
In any event, all suggestions will be considered for the possible
tweaking of the rules for future elections, but the rules for the
2012 election, which starts tomorrow, won't change.
vpFREE Administrator
____________________________________
vpFREE Administrator posted on 4 DEC:
My goal is to preserve the exclusivity of the Hall of Fame,
while ensuring that worthy candidates get recognized. The
election rules are designed to accomplish this goal.
Here are the % of vote figures for the winning inductee in each
of the Hall of Fame elections.
2002 - 14.1%
2003 - 19.8%
2004 - 25.8%
2005 - 39.9%
2006 - 23.4%
2007 - 25.3%
2008 - 57.0%
Each previous Hall of Fame election has removed successful
inductees from the nominee pool. And, each removal makes it
easier for a stand-out candidate to receive a higher
percentage of the total vote.
The greater than 1/3 requirement seems reasonable and
attainable to me, but it is tweakable in future elections,
if it seems appropriate.
vpFREE Administrator
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (10) |
