Sure, no problem. An account will be set up just for voting. PMs will be sent to it. The previous CAW winner will have the job of communicating back to the voter that the vote was recorded. ALL previous CAW winners will have access to the account as a check and balance against any miscount. Whoever wins CAW 11 will gain access to the account, and so on.

If anyone believes that all previous CAW winners will conspire together to rig a vote...seek professional help, please! :excited:

You're welcome about the replies.

 

That's why there are two people receiving the votes and the members will receive a pm acknowledging their choice. The member can also choose to announce to the forum who they voted for.

I like Ed's idea of the current host working with the last host. Then no one can be accused of choosing the "best friend" to help them.

 

I saw that problem after yourself and horse had explained. thanks. :rose:

Would it be a good idea with PM voting to get members to CC their PM's to several counters, including at least one who is in no way connected to the stories board and who has no real connection to any of the writers ?

Two people could easily fix the voting if they wished to (not saying they will).
members might get a PM acknowledgement but no way of knowing if their votes has been actually counted.

also it's been said that the counters can discount a vote if they choose to (for various reasons).

i know it's difficult to come to a perfect solution but just thought i'd raise some points where some members might find fault.

 

My understanding is that it won't just be two people but rather ALL previous CAW winners will have access to the account. That will stop any collusion. And, by having one account, it won't make it difficult for someone to PM.

 

thanks again for answering horse.

i think if that's the case then you're covering all bases. having all previous winners seeing all votes is a great way.
although ej says it is two counters.

now just need to find a way to stop all sock votes. though that is going to be impossible really.

 

How will we know who we're corresponding with?

Will whoever is at the helm identify themselves or are we talking to sockymcsockerson#1 the vote tallier?

I'm not quite understanding the process.

 

Maybe we could ram in a sub-clause that nobody can vote if they have joined Xnxx after the story challenge has officially started?

 

better still make it voters must have been here 3 months or more and have over 100 posts.

would prevent a large majority of socks.

 

One idea that was bandied about was to create an account whose sole purpose would be to receive CAW votes. It would have an easily identifiable name, and its address would be included in the CAW threads. ALL previous CAW winners would be sent PMs by whomever initially sets up the account, giving those people (ejls, MrFors, smcaaphd, JayneyRedd, Elaken-Palmer, ahorsewithnoname, and myself, so far) the password to the account.

All of us can check the math (and the integrity) of each other, but probably only the current CAW host (ejls) and one other person would actively tally votes and acknowledge them.

Using the site-provided poll structure was fine. It was easy, it had a few options, but it had two fatal flaws: the 25-story limit, and the fact that it was set for eternity as soon as it was posted.

During CAW #10, two writers got themselves banned, so their entries had to be removed. That blew the poll structure, so counting was done offsite by spreadsheet.

There WERE errors in the running tallies in CAW #10. The fact that TWO people were counting independently of each other made it possible to fix that.

What other option is there? If we go back to the old poll structure, that's fine. Assuming no one fucks it up for the rest of us.

We are less than two weeks away from ejls' stated starting date for CAW #11. Let's get this settled now. We've had input from a lot of different people.

If this doesn't work, we can all work together to come up with something else for CAW #12.

For God's sake, people, it's a fucking challenge -- an unpaid amateur writing competition. ejls said it in her original post for the original CAW -- she double dog dared people to write something. That was basically it.

ELP mentioned the Oscars, when discussing suspense and the thrill of winning, and he's right -- it's kinda cool. But it's really not quite that cool.

Sheesh.

 

What a wonderfully big place you have there from those redwood forests to the Gulf Stream waters...

One time zone here so we get polling counts and Political Scientists postulating outcomes from about an hour in.

The front runner syndrome, yeah possibly but there has been one landslide (yours) most have been fairly close as I recall.

I still think if the idea of just vote for the one you like best were to be encouraged this reluctance to vote would be diminished. Sometimes its just a convenient excuse anyway.

 

Good call m21 but rather think you just picked those numbers at random. Should make it 2 months and three days, and maybe 101 posts

 

Good ideas. How long can we stand the rules to be, though?

Maybe that's something the individual CAW host could decide for him/herself.

Or not. Some people have forum socks a hell of a lot older than some I have in my dresser drawer.

Remember the sockmonster debacle in CAW #7? Even socks created just to join in the fight would now be about nine months old.

As Clarise says, this is why we can't have nice things.

 

Section One Fine as Drafted
Section Two Fine as drafted
Section Three Fine as drafted
Section Four Time frames, Debate
Section Five Don't agree with no posting prior.
Section Six Fine as drafted, though there is deadline so why not just use that.
Seven Debate. If you go with this 'closed to all but the official
counters routine ' interest will die and the result, as I said
before , will be an anti climax.

 

There's front runner syndrome, and I suspect some readers who come late to the party will actually read only the top two or three stories before voting. The could assume that, since no one else liked a story, they wouldn't either. There could be merit to at least trying the "secret" tally, with results revealed at the end, if suspense is what you're looking for.

Your second paragraph -- yeah. Voting shouldn't be the goal of this whole exercise. Writing and reading should be.





Dusting off my keyboard, looking at all my unfinished stories, deciding which ones I'm going to file away, and which one I'm going to try to finish before May 1st.

Gettin' psyched!

[YOUTUBE]xm5DPlNCmtk[/YOUTUBE]

"Get your motor runnin'
Head out on the highway
Lookin' for adventure
And whatever comes our way
Yeah Darlin' go make it happen
Take the world in a love embrace
Fire all of your guns at once
And explode into space"​

 

This has become much more technical than it needs to be... sadly people will cheat... I have no idea why people will cheat but they will... wish some people would cheat for me... so that I could totally break the minds and wills of all the other writers... but that won't happen... I think the story needs to be on the stories site... speaking of which I posted a new one... well a new addition to one of my serials... no one sent me nudie pictures to convince me that I should write a particular story... and no ELP and WSF... I do not want nudie pics from either of you....

 

In part, yes. The secrecy aspect or potential aspect concerns me with voting by PM.

It isn't enough to be run fairly and impartially; those interested have to see it is too.

That was why I favor a poll; its a Site driven thing, we may have reservations on who's a sock and who isn't but we can trust the poll to reflect the votes cast.

Speaking of a sock voting; so what. As long as only one vote is cast by the brain concerned there's no reason why that shouldn't stand.


These things should be fun and exciting, especially for the entrants and in the effort to tie it up so no one can cheat it seems to me the fun part is going to go too.

 

If the situation you have explained exists, then the voters choices should be made public in the final announcement.

I'm not sure how one could discount a vote - one person/one vote. It's simple math.

 

4. Debate? A month to write. One day/submission to read. Two weekends and the days in between to vote, so that anyone away on vacation at the time will also have the opportunity to vote.

5. Prior posting - we're going back to the original rules of the CAW. I'm not sure why you have a problem with that. It levels the playing field because of the amount of time one can campaign (I hate that) and submissions coming in at the same time are easier to track. If the host were getting paid to do this I wouldn't care, but things have to be easy for them, also.

6. Not sure why this is an issue for you. When all submissions are received they will be posted with all links that were provided to the host. Based on the number of entries, a voting date will be announced.

7. Votes will be submitted to a CAW account that can be accessed by all former CAW winners. Voters will receive confirmation of their vote and will understand that voting by pm allows that their name and vote will be revealed in the final announcement. If they wish to announce who they voted for, that is their option. We're only talking 9 days between start of voting and end. I have no problem waiting to find out who wins. No one is here every single day, not even us. I don't believe a daily update is necessary.

 

So really you're determined to go ahead with what was proposed originally.

If you're dead set on ruining the thing go right ahead.

 

Those are the points you object to - I offered explanation and am looking forward to other people's comments.

Please note - I don't need your permission to go right ahead.