BR
That isn't a system that would deliver effective rankings through the contest - it would just deliver a winner wouldn't it? Fine for a "chose 1 song from N songs" competition - but a non-starter for a "rank N songs in order of popularity" competition.
How would you deliver a decent leaderboard without letting "the others" distort it?
If you did the obvious and dumped the 18 non-competing countries into an "others" pile - they would be awarding 216, 180, 144 points (and 126 down to 1
en masse - so that they still gave their "12,10,8 etc." but multiplied by the number of countries whose votes make up that block ?
Trust me to pick the argument with the one person who takes Eurovision seriously!
You're being rather petty now - it's obvious that by lumping the "others" into one category I mean their combined vote would be worth 12, 10, 8... not multiplying it by the number of countries involved.
We basically disagree on two fundamental things here - I think voting rights should be restricted to those who make the final, you think everyone who enters initially should be able to vote.
I understand why you say that - but I think in trying to increase interest in the countries that often don't make it they're alienating the rest of the EBU who I suspect widely agree something needs to be done about the voting structure.
If a few countries drop out - so what, there's too many entrants anyway, but if one of the "big four" pulls out, which as things stand I think is likely to happen sooner or later, the whole competition could be put in jeopardy.
What I propose gives every viewer the opportunity to vote, but the votes of qualifying countries will be worth more than those who didn't make it - which I think is fair enough.
noggin posted:
Brekkie posted:
The voting system I'm basing my idea on is Big Brother Africa, which had housemates from 12 countries but was viewed in many more. For evictions each country represented by a housemate had one vote, with a thirteenth "neutral" vote compiled up of all the non-participating countries, which was also used to break any ties.
That isn't a system that would deliver effective rankings through the contest - it would just deliver a winner wouldn't it? Fine for a "chose 1 song from N songs" competition - but a non-starter for a "rank N songs in order of popularity" competition.
How would you deliver a decent leaderboard without letting "the others" distort it?
If you did the obvious and dumped the 18 non-competing countries into an "others" pile - they would be awarding 216, 180, 144 points (and 126 down to 1
en masse - so that they still gave their "12,10,8 etc." but multiplied by the number of countries whose votes make up that block ?
Trust me to pick the argument with the one person who takes Eurovision seriously!
You're being rather petty now - it's obvious that by lumping the "others" into one category I mean their combined vote would be worth 12, 10, 8... not multiplying it by the number of countries involved.
We basically disagree on two fundamental things here - I think voting rights should be restricted to those who make the final, you think everyone who enters initially should be able to vote.
I understand why you say that - but I think in trying to increase interest in the countries that often don't make it they're alienating the rest of the EBU who I suspect widely agree something needs to be done about the voting structure.
If a few countries drop out - so what, there's too many entrants anyway, but if one of the "big four" pulls out, which as things stand I think is likely to happen sooner or later, the whole competition could be put in jeopardy.
What I propose gives every viewer the opportunity to vote, but the votes of qualifying countries will be worth more than those who didn't make it - which I think is fair enough.
