Tie votes in vote chess

personally if it is a tie how about you choose the vote from the highest rated team member

What if the highest rated member made a inferior move leaving the other move the best to be made by the tie?

Paolo_Vacarelli you mean me

or you choose by looking at the average rating of the players that voted for each move then the move with the highest average goes ahead

Let us say one possible vote has 1 vote, another possible vote has 3 votes, and the last possible vote has 3. the problem is still there, because there is still a tie that we have to figure out

but it is less likely a bad move by this system, than the one by the current system

It appears to me that you don't understand what I am presenting. I will make a hypothetical example for how it would work.

Lets say in our example game on move 1, white's team starts with a team of 7 players. This would satisfy the prerequisite I described for having an odd number of players. Let's say that one of the players who agree to participate has to quit the game before voting. At that time another of white's teammates is welcome to take their place. Let's say none of white's non-adminstrative teammates is able. Then a vote of three to three occurs. That is when one of the predesignated SA's steps in and votes, breaking the tie.

I see no flaw in that system. Please show me where I am missing something. I think you must have joined in on my conversation with another and didn't read everything I was originally proposing. If you feel your previous post did indeed describe how my idea misses the mark. I am asking for a clarification. Your post was rather vague to me. It had too many pronouns. It needs to be more descriptive. I could take what your were saying a few different ways and none of them seemed to give creedence to the idea that I overlooked something.

what if they all voted for different moves?

ok i understand, with the SA tiebreaker, it will work

There are a few issues with Vote Chess.

Frst of all,  intensely dislike the name Vote Chess, the name alone instills the idea in many players that they have the right (anonymously, of course) to vote for any rubbish that pops into their skulls. And they think this "right" is made holy by the constitution of whichever country they are from.

I say call it what it is, (and I'm sure what the original intention was), CONSULTATION CHESS.

Some groups don't mind casual voting by whoever for whatever, other groups have strict rules. I personally like playing in the teams that have strict rules, the only problem is that because of the opacity of the votes there is no way to enforce these rules.

I'd like to see:

1. You are unable to cast a vote until you have posted in the comments section.
2. Your vote is public, everybody can see what you voted for
3. This silly rule that you can't see the votes cast until you yourself has voted, must go.
4. Ties are decided by last move voted for
5. Maybe you should have the opportunity to change your vote before the deadline?
6. Comments tracking in Vote games should be automatic, and cannot be turned off.
7. [edit] and reminders should be sent when 75% of the alloted time has expired

yes i agree except with 5

i think that whichever move had the higher average rating of people who voted for it should win, and if that is a tie, than whoever has the highest rating and voted should win

I dont like a tiebreak vote by anybody, tiebreak should be automatic, and happen when the time expires.

But, it shouls be a more sensible tiebrak than 1st move voted for.

The designated SA would break the tie...as I said before, it shouldn't matter how many of each vote...it would still have be done within the predetermined time frame and also it could still be discussed within the group so that the SA could make the decidind vote. The whole idea of requiring anonymity within the group is silly considering most of the time, each member clearly states and should state their choice and why.

You are wrong, I have clearly stated a few different times that the tie breaking vote would still have to be cast within the predetermined 3 days per. It is up to each team to get it together within that time, or else the vote would default to the system set up, which I agree should be changed to the highest rated player, but giving the SA the final say would before the deadline would ensure a proper vote, incase of a disagreement between lets say 1- 2255 rated player, how may have an ego problem while a 2135, 2095 and a 1949 all agree to a move. Having an SA settle it within the group prevent the silly default to always be to the highest rated player. What if that player turns out to be a cheat, or why not just always pit the highest rated player within each group against each other while the others are a 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc...

This is only way to ensure it remains a group oriented activity.

i am saying the average rating of the move. If and only if in the rare case that the average ratings are the same, than we will put it to the highest rated player. It would be rare that it ever comes down to that though.

@ Rooperi

I agree with everything you propose except for one small difference. Though I agree the system default should change from the first vote to the last vote because, usually the last vote is what the team realizes they want and need, while casting the final votes. However, this should only be an absolute fails safe.

I still believe the best way is to have a rotating set of SA's who aren't casting ordinary votes at the time, be left in reserve to cast tie breaking votes only if necessary. If odd numbered groups of players agree to play the match and substitutes are assigned to take the place of any who have to drop out, it would be best. It saves the SA's for what they would be intended for.

Also changing the vote option would help avoid 90% of this entire issue. If a mouse slip, or over exuberant newby who meant well chooses wrong, it wouldn't be too late to talk some sense to them. I have to shake my head why others wouldn't agree to this, it isn't as if if gives anyone an advantage over the others.

Obviously it doesn't always occur smoothly as you make it sound. Aparently there are some disgruntled folks about the system defaulting to the first vote cast, or taking issue with it being the last vote cast. Along with this being one part of a system that I propose, it is good. In the current system, it's true value isn't appreciated, that is because the system is so flawed. Everyone tends to view it as a bandaid on a wound that needs sutures to be taken care of properly. Once the bleeding is stopped, the bandaid helps to cover the unsightly wound that once was.

Click on Archive, and then the last move number.  In the URL add 2 to the number after mv=.  Highlight the new URL, and hit Enter.  You can now see the current vote total for your team without having to vote.