Update votes when deleting and merging workshops?

[franc6]

When using the moderation page, the admin can delete a workshop, or merge two workshops. Since the workflow allows moderation after voting has started, should we also update the votes if a workshop is deleted or merged? For example, if a workshop is deleted, it doesn't make sense for it to still have votes, and calculating the results (which the admin may or may not do intentionally) could result in some odd results.

Likewise, if two workshops are merged, should the resulting single workshop get all of the votes for both? This case isn't as simple as it sounds, though, since it's likely that a user voted for both workshops that were merged together, and DB table constraints would disallow a simple merge here. If we want to merge votes, we should probably drop duplicate votes, keeping the higher vote for the resulting workshop (e.g. a user may have given a full vote to the first workshop, and only a .25 vote to the second, the end result should give a single full vote to the merged workshop). Again, this will certainly change the final results, but likely increase the vote total for the merged workshop, giving it better priority for attendees, which is probably the desired outcome.

[tpokorra]

for ICCM Europe, we only have a voting period of a couple of hours, so we usually don't moderate after voting has started. We only moderate before the voting has started, to merge workshops that sound very similar, to avoid splitting votes and losing both workshops altogether. I for myself like the process to be as transparent as possible, so merging workshops during or after the voting would confuse people. and in the end, another workshop will fall off the list, and people might not understand that.

It sounds like you have a different scenario. Then your suggestion makes sense. Good point to consider the quarter votes.

[franc6]

As I recall, in the US, we try to do any merging before the voting starts, too, but it frequently doesn't quite work out that way, with some getting merged shortly after voting has started -- I don't know what the old software did in that case, but I think there were generally only a few people who had voted, and since voting wasn't over, they could adjust their votes. The moderation page isn't available during voting, but is available after voting, as well as before voting. The fact that it's available after voting is what made me think merging and deleting might need to adjust votes. :) We try to get merging done before most people have voted,* but sometimes fail. Our voting periods tend to be from before lunch until after the evening meal, while we look at the list after nominations close for only a few minutes together. We often miss something, and when we meet together to view the results, we sometimes merge things again. With two meals in there, different people have had time to talk about what BoFs they're interested in, and notice when similar topics whose write-ups are very different are really the same. :) It's kinda like the titles and descriptions are written by people with poor written communication skills. ;) This means that after the voting is done, we sometimes merge topics together, at the request of the people who nominated them. If the topics both got a lot of votes, merging them would allow for another workshop to take place, but if they didn't get quite enough separately, then another would drop off. I'll try to gather some more opinions -- I'm not sure how much scheduling v tradition affects some of the problems above. :) * Usually, the voting period has started as soon as nominations close, so while we do the initial discussion about merges, people are already voting -- which this new software could fix. I have no idea if the old software could have been used to prevent that.

…

On 8/5/20 12:19 AM, Timotheus Pokorra wrote: for ICCM Europe, we only have a voting period of a couple of hours, so we usually don't moderate after voting has started. We only moderate before the voting has started, to merge workshops that sound very similar, to avoid splitting votes and losing both workshops altogether. I for myself like the process to be as transparent as possible, so merging workshops during or after the voting would confuse people. and in the end, another workshop will fall off the list, and people might not understand that. It sounds like you have a different scenario. Then your suggestion makes sense. Good point to consider the quarter votes. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#111 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAYXEZNCG5WKJIRJPZE256DR7DMU5ANCNFSM4PUWADBQ>.