BSFA Shadow Awards
Welcome. This experiment is looking to see how differently the BSFA awards would pan out if conducted under a Condorcet voting scheme. A what? Consider the pathological case where there are three books and two reviewers; the first reviewer has read the first two books, and thinks the first is better than the second, and the second reviewer has read the second and third books and thinks the second is better than the third.
With me so far? So, the reviewers vote accordingly. Under the first-past-the-post system which the BSFA currently uses (where the books would have accumulated scores of 3, 5, and 2 points, respectively), the second book would win the top prize since it has more votes by virtue of the fact that more voters have read this book than either of the others. But under a Condorcet scheme, the first book would win the top prize as this is the only book which has not been beaten by either of the other books.
Thus, there are two distinct advantages to the scheme we use here to rate books:
- A book does not win just because it is popular; it wins because it is considered a better read by the majority of voters who expressed a preference than all of the other books;
- It does not matter that all reviewers have not read all books — failure of a reviewer to rank a particular book makes no difference to that book's rating.
Given that scant few of BSFA members (plus sundry EasterCon attendees) can have read all the material on all of the shortlists, it would seem that the Condorcet method would fit very well with the needs of the association's awards. It would produce awards made by the 'masses' based on material content, as opposed to either awards made by expert panels based on content or awards made by the masses based on popularity, thus giving the BSFA awards a unique selling point. The awards should also be considered more accurate, in that voters are less inclined to make fictitious entries (for example, voting for a book they've never read simply because they like other books by that author, thinking that failing to vote would unjustly push that book down the ratings).
Here we use specifically the Schulze method. A full description of the analysis of the results will be given here once the voting is complete.
Please note, we are not here to spoil a party. The voting is completely anonymous, there are no prizes (apart from kudos), and nothing will be disclosed or analyzed until after the BSFA awards are announced, at which point full disclosure will be made (bearing in mind the anonymity!)
Also note that we are not imposing any kind of security or authentication on the voting. At the moment this is just a bit of fun; please play fair so that all involved can get some insight into this intriguing form of voting system. Thank you.
Proceed to voting form —>Discuss this in the Fanland Village