In CAP 5, we had a lot of close polls. They were so close, that many of them could easily have ended in a tie. If that happened, we have no set procedure for determining the winner.If you are not an experienced member of the CAP community, it is strongly recommended that you do not post in this thread.
This thread is intended to contain intelligent discussion and commentary by experienced members of the CAP project regarding CAP policy, process, and rules. As such, the content of this thread will be moderated more strictly than other threads on the forum. The posting rules for Policy Review threads are contained here.
I propose the following steps to break a tie between options in a poll:
1) The sum total of all votes accumulated in all previous polls
2) The number of votes recieved in the single most recent previous poll
3) Topic leader choice
2) The number of votes recieved in the single most recent previous poll
3) Topic leader choice
Those tiebreakers would be applied in sequential order until a winner is determined. It is highly unlikely that either of the first two steps would result in subsequent ties -- but if it happened, then the TL needs to make the choice and move on.
There was talk about holding new polls to break the tie. I am STRONGLY opposed to that. If you have read my "Project Pace" thread, then you know why. This proposal provides a clear, objective way to determine a winner, without extending the length of the project. This also gives a slight reward to options that accumulate a lot of votes in early polls. Up until now, it is common to hear people remark that "Early voting leads are meaningless". If we adopt this tiebreaking procedure, they won't be meaningless.