<$BlogRSDUrl$>


Sunday, July 11, 2004

Reader Queries 

An anonymous reader asks,

Can you describe what constitutes a "valid ballot?"

I've heard a lot of noise over the years about "unexpected" results being discarded. The Sharon Lee and Steve Miller controversy comes to mind.


Reply: There are roughly three types of *invalid* ballots. The most common is when someone filling out the online ballot inadvertantly hits the 'enter' key (rather than the tab key) and causes their partially filled-out ballot to be submitted via email. They realize their error, complete their ballot, and submit again. This results in 2 email ballot submissions from the same person within a couple minutes of each other. In these cases, the latter is counted as valid; the earlier (partially completed) is discarded.

Another kind of invalid vote is where someone deliberately votes for the same item more than once in the same category. The rules say not to do this, but some voters try it anyway (sometimes 5 times in a category!). Needless to say, we here at Locus Online have sophisticated database queries to detect such multiple votes -- since we can't personally examine every one of the 5 or 6 hundred ballots -- and all such invalid votes are discarded. We could be much harsher than this, and discard the entire ballots of those who commit this violation, but we don't--we count one vote per item per category, in the lower/lowest position the multiple voter placed it, and disregard the others.

A variant of violation #1 is where a voter submits a second ballot several weeks after submitting their first. Sometimes they even fill in their name and subscriber number both times--as if to flaunt their violation. (Well, maybe they forgot they'd voted before.) Other times they don't, but the pattern of votes (along with survey responses) is obvious. Again, we could be harsh and disregard *both* submissions, but we don't; we disregard obvious repeat votes, but count the first (or most complete) from each voter.

The final category of suspect ballots is where numerous submissions are received within a short period of time that all vote for the same item--often only a particular item, leaving the rest of the ballot blank. This presumably occurs when a notice is posted about the Locus Poll ballot on some writer's site, whose fans are prompted to link to the online Locus Poll and vote for their favorite writer's currently eligible book. To some degree, this happens almost every year. In most cases, it doesn't affect the final outcome. This happened a few years ago described as the "Sharon Lee and Steve Miller controversy", though in that case the online poll was a parallel poll, and those votes didn't affect the official Locus Poll results whether or not those votes were included or not.

Another anonymous reader asks,


What's the print run of LOCUS?


Answer: roughly 9000. Less than 10K. Locus Online, meanwhile, has 5-6K unique visitors per day, or 30+K unique visitors per week.

Comments: Post a Comment


king under the dome

doctorow makers

banks transition

kress steal sky

atwood year flood

roberts yellow blue tibia

wilson julian comstock

 ness ask and answer

collins catching fire

collins hunger games

sawyer flashforward

baker hotel

disch proteus

tan tales

mazzucchelli asterios

zebrowski empties

morrow shambling

hamilton cpt future

beckett genesis

meller evo rx

bsg2

kurzweil transcend

sawyer wake

ness knife never letting go

barzak love we share

mcewan cement garden

holland sci-fi art

gladwell outliers

bittman food matters

baggini what's it all about

Still in progress:

ross rest is noise

aldiss billion year spree

pollan omnivore's dilemma



Mark R. Kelly
Profile
Email

The opinions expressed in this blog are solely those of Mark R. Kelly, and do not reflect the editorial position of Locus Magazine.
Locus
Links
Latest Posts
Archives

  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?