MotF 104: Mind the Gap - Voting thread

Whose map was best?

  • Xibalba

    Votes: 6 7.9%
  • Jonathan Edelstein

    Votes: 11 14.5%
  • Dr. Nodelescu

    Votes: 8 10.5%
  • King Alvar I

    Votes: 1 1.3%
  • islander

    Votes: 10 13.2%
  • Pischinovski

    Votes: 10 13.2%
  • lock

    Votes: 14 18.4%
  • psephos

    Votes: 1 1.3%
  • Alex Richards

    Votes: 2 2.6%
  • CourageousLife

    Votes: 9 11.8%
  • Ares96

    Votes: 4 5.3%

  • Total voters
    76
  • Poll closed .
It's quite a tricky situation really. We've got a lot of subtle variations on the same theme here, so I'm going to do another 'thinking-out-loud' idea.

CourageousLife's is, I think, the prettiest, but also the one which least fits the brief. Beyond that, the aesthetic differences give a bit of differentiation (Tallinn's issues of size-info compared to islander's street plan style), but for me the big issue comes down to one of explanation-

fundamentally, too many of these for me get a 'nice map, but why have you made those decisions' reaction. I physically cannot differentiate between Psephos's Oxford and Ares's Malmo because both are aesthetically very similar, and I don't know the greater area of either city well enough to understand why the choices have been made, thus without a description I can't work out why the network looks like that. The ones laid out on a map help mitigate this to some extent, but still leave the essential question of what makes *this* neighbourhood a better link than *that* one.

I thus find myself torn between Lock and Dr Noldescu. Both give detail for why the network looks like that, with a similar 'on plan' style. I think Noldescu has a better look and integration though. Point for the early frontrunner, though I don't think it's as guaranteed as I'd have assumed earlier.
 
Unsure for now. Doubting between lock and Xibalba's entries, although I do like quite a few others, but those two appeal most to me. That being said, I don't know if for the future, when making a transport-related map, giving such a restricted topic is a good idea, as it will result in (imho) overtly similar entries.
 
It was between islander and lock: the former got my vote for creating not only a metro but a city, but all those Johnson puns surely deserve some reward.
 
The poll looks kinda like a Christmas tree. Would Krall really go on and write eight honorable mentions? A fierce competition is of course to be cherished.

Anyway, I voted as egotistic as always. But I desire greatly Lock's Johnson to ride and Xibalba's interurban rail System. Islander's map looks great too, but I'm a bit disappointed that his grid is so modest in comparison to the opportunity that lies in a completely new and fictious egopolis.
 

Krall

Banned
Damn, I missed this by a day - and it's the only map contest I would ever be able to enter, because of this article I wrote and the map I made for it (scroll to the end to see the map). Ah well, best of luck to those competing, I particularly like the MadRail one.

I'm afraid you wouldn't've been able to enter with that article and map, as entries must be made specifically for the contest. :eek:

Am I the only one who can't see Psephos' map?

Odd, I can see it fine. Does this direct link to the image work?

http://s29.postimg.org/v1aeqwh5h/Tube256_16_24_2.png
 
I'm afraid you wouldn't've been able to enter with that article and map, as entries must be made specifically for the contest. :eek:

Oh that's alright then :)

There's no way I'd've made one of those again. I made it so hard for myself the first time around. Good luck to everyone!
 
I know who voted for you though.
Thank you very much!

Dear God, this is starting to look like a Belgian general election.
"The Almighty Fortnight King Krall is speaking! As Alex Richard said, lock and Dr. No have quite similar entries. Together they'd make a clear winner, so let it be a Map Duel between you two, islander be damned."

4-way map duel!
I wish to avoid this. I'm easily the worst map maker among us four if it's about leaving the comfort zone.


EDIT: You know what? I don't see another darkhouse beyond the four "leaders" now. Should we really wait till the end of the week with the vote or rather skip the latest three quarters of the week and go directly into runoff mode? Remember, these dispersed 40 per cent of votes could actually make a difference if they get mopped up.

EDIT 2: Pischinovski got his fifth vote, ranking #5 now. Damn. Things get more and more complicated.
 
Last edited:
It seems a bit premature to declare a winner or even a slate of contenders. The MotF polls often draw 70 to 90 voters; there are only 49 thus far in this one, and the gap between first and seventh place is three votes. At this point, a six-way tie is entirely possible, although hopefully we'll avoid such an outcome.

This is a situation that cries out for AV; in the absence of a mechanism for doing that, maybe contests with this many entries should use approval voting?

I'm very gratified, BTW, to see that I'm in contention, and I'd like to thank everyone who's voted for the Kinshasa-Brazzaville Metro, as well as everyone who'll do so before the polls close.
 
I'd be more inclined to vote for people if they didn't utterly blow up their maps to the point that I need to zoom out 900% in order to see them properly.
 
56 votes so far

8 votes - islander, lock
7 votes - CourageousLife, Dr. Nodelescu, Pischinovski
6 votes - Jonathan Edelstein
5 votes - Xibalba
4 votes - Ares96
2 votes - Alex Richards
1 vote - King Alvar I, psephos

Nice to see I've been overtaken for the first time. Anyway, the "upper" half of contestants each have between 10 and 15 per cent of the votes. No matter what kind of criteria a rulebook would set in the future, we see there are lot of contestants that are really neck and neck and that any winner of this round may find a bigger empiric disapproval than any of the losers.

My proposal for cases like this:
MAP OF THE FORTNIGHT - "BELGIAN ELECTION" RULE AMENDMENT

A. The following rules shall apply after a MotF voting round any time whenever no less than three of the following conditions have been met, that
(I) there are no less than eight contestants.
(II) the leading contestant unites no more than 20 per cent of the vote.
(III) the runner-up unites no less than three quarters of the votes of the leading contestant.
(IV) the first and second runners-up unite more votes together than the leading contestant alone.

B. If a case for application as outlined in Article A occures,
(I) no winners or duelists shall be determined for the moment.
(II) any contestant who achieved no more than the mean of votes plus half a vote shall be considered knocked out, however.
(III) any remaining contestants shall be up for elimination vote as outlined in Section C.

C. The contest overseer opens the poll wherein the remaining contestants stand for elimination.
(I) The elimination vote shall not take any longer than 72 hours.
(II) The minimum of contestants uniting 40 per cent of disapproval votes shall be considered knocked out.
(III) If said minimum of contestants constitutes less than the rounded off third of remaining contestants, the entirety of said rounded off third shall nonetheless be considered knocked out.
(IV) If the number of knocked out contestants in a case as outlined in Subsection 3 grows beyond said rounded off third due to a parity of votes among several contestants, they shall nevertheless be considered knocked out from the competition in their entirety.

D. The contestants remaining after the regime outlined in Section C shall be up for a third and (hopefully) final approving runoff vote.
(I) If there is only one remaining contestant, contestants knocked out via Section C Subsection IV with the highest number of original votes shall be re-called into the final vote.
(II) If there are exactly two remaining contestants, the winner shall be determined in a Map Duel. This includes cases outlined in Section D Subsection I.
(III) Unless in cases outlined in Section D Subsection II where traditional customs shall apply, the runoff vote shall not take any longer than 72 hours.
 

Krall

Banned
This is a situation that cries out for AV; in the absence of a mechanism for doing that, maybe contests with this many entries should use approval voting?

I see no reason why we should change voting systems based on the number of entries, especially considering we've had numerous rounds in the past with more entries than this.

My proposal for cases like this:

I am vehemently opposed to making the MotF contest more complicated than it needs to be, and I'm afraid your proposal is horrendously over-complicated.
 
Top