Single Comment

When I begin the next poll, I will be listing variants by name instead of
by preset page ID. Since the method of voting I'll be using is cloneproof
(explained below), it isn't a problem to include multiple versions of the
same game in the next poll. I already plan to exclude very similar games
from both being played in the tournament. If a pair of very similar games
both ranked highly in the next poll, only the higher ranking game would be
included in the tournament. My reasoning behind this is that wanting one
thing and wanting another doesn't always imply that you want both
together. Presumably, we want a bit of variety in the tournament rather
than close variations on the same game. So, for example, Shatranj and
Chaturanga will not both be played in the tournament, and Yáng Qí and
Eurasian Chess will not both be played in the tournament. However, I am
not counting two games as very similar when one is a standard regional
variant and the other is a variant of it. So, for example, Yáng Qí and
Chinese Chess could both be played if they get enough votes.

Here's the significance of a cloneproof voting method. Consider the Borda
Count method, which is not cloneproof. It gives one point to each
preference in last place, 2 points to each in next-to-last place, and so
on going up. Using letters to consider preferences, consider these votes:

60 ABC
50 BCA

A majority prefers A to both B and C, meaning that A should win. But B has
a higher Borda Count than A. It has 270 points vs. A's 230 points. The
reason it has so many points is because it is part of a clone-pair with C.
Suppose that B and C are two very similar variants, such as Shatranj and
Chaturanga, while A is something very different, such as Shogi. The votes
come out like this, because those who like Shatranj also like Chaturanga
nearly as much. This sort of thing would screw things up if the voting
method wasn't cloneproof, but the method I'll be using is. Given these
votes, it would give the win to A.