2 words, last one's ...awlLuke_PieStalker wrote:Well done winners.
Educate me - What is the 'award' given the the also rans in the list. As in 4th,5th,6th etc?
2 words, last one's ...awlLuke_PieStalker wrote:Well done winners.
Educate me - What is the 'award' given the the also rans in the list. As in 4th,5th,6th etc?
kevinchess1 wrote:2 words, last one's ...awlLuke_PieStalker wrote:Well done winners.
Educate me - What is the 'award' given the the also rans in the list. As in 4th,5th,6th etc?
Isn't that how it currently works?Mel wrote:One thought that comes to mind is to use an equation of number of thankers multiplied by their shareholding.
I think what Mel means is explained by the following example:mark_r_abcd wrote:Isn't that how it currently works?Mel wrote:One thought that comes to mind is to use an equation of number of thankers multiplied by their shareholding.
Correct. I knew I could rely on Richard to understand.richard@imutual wrote:Could do. Apart from taking longer though, there is also a danger that the poll would be representative because only a small number of members would bother to vote. Using a month's worth of 'thanking' to determine the winners, rather than just to produce a shortlist, ensures you get a wider view.
I think what Mel means is explained by the following example:mark_r_abcd wrote:Isn't that how it currently works?Mel wrote:One thought that comes to mind is to use an equation of number of thankers multiplied by their shareholding.
5 people vote for a post. 4 of them have 100 shares and 1 of them has 5000 shares. The total shares (for the purpose of potm) would be (4+1)*(100+100+100+100+5000) = 5 *5400 = 27000
Am I right, Mel?
Just my two cents worth.1960mackem wrote:What other measurement tools have you got to give a fair outcome ?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests