Man, that poll is just, tough. I am sorry to see you were nailed in that poll.

Figures Tufi would arrange the entries differently this time.

*is ridiculously irritated*

~D

Figures Tufi would arrange the entries differently this time.

 

*is ridiculously irritated*

 

 

~D

I used the exact same method I always do. Should I prepare myself to hear a complaint?

No, no, no, they're arranged differently than the last time.

Last time, and the time before that, IIRC, you put entry 1, 11, 21, 31, 41.... in the first poll, and 2, 12, 22, 32, 42..... in the next poll.

It's different this time, though, since Roa had entry 112, and I had entry 29. Which means you didn't arrange them the same way.

~D

No, no, no, they're arranged differently than the last time.

 

Last time, and the time before that, IIRC, you put entry 1, 11, 21, 31, 41.... in the first poll, and 2, 12, 22, 32, 42..... in the next poll.

 

It's different this time, though, since Roa had entry 112, and I had entry 29. Which means you didn't arrange them the same way.

 

 

~D

The first part is always true. While there's still enough entries to make that system work perfectly, that's what I do.

The problem comes when I wind up with an uneven number of entries, and believe me, no contest yet has ended with x10 pollable entries. It's then a frenzy of moving the extras into preexisting polls that come up a bit short, shuffling numbers a bit so that the last few polls aren't entirely later entries at the very least, freaking out over possibly-lost entries, starting all over again because I won't take any less assurance than the original .txt file...

I've mixed later entries into 'earlier' polls, too. It's nothing new in the least.

I voted for you!

No, no, no, they're arranged differently than the last time.

 

Last time, and the time before that, IIRC, you put entry 1, 11, 21, 31, 41.... in the first poll, and 2, 12, 22, 32, 42..... in the next poll.

 

It's different this time, though, since Roa had entry 112, and I had entry 29. Which means you didn't arrange them the same way.

 

 

~D

The first part is always true. While there's still enough entries to make that system work perfectly, that's what I do.

 

The problem comes when I wind up with an uneven number of entries, and believe me, no contest yet has ended with x10 pollable entries. It's then a frenzy of moving the extras into preexisting polls that come up a bit short, shuffling numbers a bit so that the last few polls aren't entirely later entries at the very least, freaking out over possibly-lost entries, starting all over again because I won't take any less assurance than the original .txt file...

 

I've mixed later entries into 'earlier' polls, too. It's nothing new in the least.

Why not put the first ten in one poll, the second ten in the next, etc? It'd make it easier to find our MOCs.

-CF