-2

I think it'd be nice to have the option to sort the nominees by the current vote tally during the primaries.

I can see having a random order when the page loads, but it would be great if we could easily see who's in the lead.

I'm can do it easily enough like this:

var posts = $('.vote-count-post').get();
posts.sort(function(a,b){
    return +(a.innerHTML || 0) - +(b.innerHTML || 0);
});
var tbody = $(posts[0]).closest('tbody');
$.each(posts,function() {
    tbody.prepend($(this).closest('tr'));
});

...but a simple click to sort would be super.

  • Isn't that a minor tweak to a rarely used feature (elections)? Perhaps the developers have more important/urgent/profitable things to implement. – ChrisW Jan 26 '11 at 1:38
  • @ChrisW: Yep, minor tweak. – user147519 Jan 26 '11 at 1:46
  • Looks like the vote tallies for withdrawn nominees have returned. They must be doing some minor tweaks. – user147519 Jan 26 '11 at 1:55
  • Wow, two down votes. Was this suggestion really that offensive? Would anyone care to explain their vote? – user147519 Jan 26 '11 at 3:22
  • @patrick: Read this before you get too worked up: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/270/… – BenV Jan 26 '11 at 5:02
  • @BenV: Thank you for the link. I agree with the answer from Bill the Lizard, which states that voters should explain why. Only comment I've received was a bit of a snarky marginalization from @ChrisW. Calling it a "minor tweak" doesn't describe the merit (or lack thereof) of the suggestion. Anyway, thanks again for the link. :o) – user147519 Jan 26 '11 at 16:56
18

We show candidates in random order to keep things fair by design.

  • Yeah, I thing that's a good policy on page load/reload. I'd think that would be sufficient to keep things fair, but at the same time, I can understand the desire to avoid potential controversy too. Thanks for the response. – user147519 Jan 26 '11 at 1:49
  • 4
    If removing withdrawn candidates is not an option, at least group them at the end of the listing. Seeing their entries mixed in can be distracting. – Jeff Mercado Jan 26 '11 at 2:04
  • 3
    How am I supposed to know who the best candidate is then? ;p – Bill the Lizard Jan 26 '11 at 2:04
  • 10
    If you really want to keep things fair, why not keep the vote tallies invisible? – Ether Jan 26 '11 at 3:33
  • @Ether: Great point. – user147519 Jan 26 '11 at 3:37
  • If its invisible someone will cry for foul; Certainly count make it biased I think they should be visible to candidates only. – Pushpak Apr 15 '15 at 11:19
4

I have followed enough stack exchange sites to understand how psychology affects the way of voting by people. A post that is above all other posts has more chances to get voted, so your proposal introduces a virtuous circle for top candidates, and a vicious circle for candidates with few votes.

Instead I think that the sorting should be random, and updated randomly every certain amount of time, in a way that whoever could be in top, without that luck influences much the elections results.

You must log in to answer this question.