2018 PCF Calendar (Interest Thread) (1 Viewer)

[AK Chip]

Three was the number that came to mind

If you limit it to 3-4 picks, odds are you will get the majority of votes for the same sets and few to one vote for the bottom 6 sets.

Creating a need for a lot of tie breaker votes

Just a newbies opinion.

 

[WedgeRock]

For many casino sets I either can go or have been to the places they were used, play with those chips, seen them in scores of pictures already on the internet, etc. It's not to say that casino sets aren't nice - some of them are exquisite! - but often times those casinos have received other publicity or were at one point widely available for use. Most custom sets, however, I'll never have the pleasure to see or use myself, so I generally vote for those sets that are otherwise far less accessible to me than casino sets; and, if I'm using this as an opportunity to see sets I'd not normally have as much access to, I may as well vote for my favorites, thus my vote tends to be a "Best/Favorite custom sets of the year" vote.

Let's be honest... casinos aren't overly concerned with the inlay or color combos. They just aren't interested in making a beautiful chip. And with few exceptions, they have succeeded (in making unremarkable chips). But I think the exact opposite is true of most people making custom sets.

 

[detroitdad]

If you limit it to 3-4 picks, odds are you will get the majority of votes for the same sets and few to one vote for the bottom 6 sets.

Creating a need for a lot of tie breaker votes

Just a newbies opinion.

That makes sense.

 

[David O]

I was thinking for nominations maybe a number like 2 or 3 with 11 votes when they get voted upon. Just my opinion but I think the the more nominations a person has the more apt they are just to nominate something because the still have "x" amount to nominate. This makes the nominator think a bit to use his nominations wisely. Then again that is just my opinion and the calendar is for the community and not just for me.

 

[David O]

If you limit it to 3-4 picks, odds are you will get the majority of votes for the same sets and few to one vote for the bottom 6 sets.

Creating a need for a lot of tie breaker votes

Just a newbies opinion.

I agree that voting you should get 11 votes but please do not confuse nominations with votes. We will nominate a number of sets and out of those sets each member will get to vote those sets by choosing 11 sets that they think should be in the calendar. This is pretty much the way the voting has been in the past. I was just questioning the number of nominations because last year we had some that nominated one set and others that nominated many.

 

[AK Chip]

I agree that voting you should get 11 votes but please do not confuse nominations with votes. We will nominate a number of sets and out of those sets each member will get to vote those sets by choosing 11 sets that they think should be in the calendar. This is pretty much the way the voting has been in the past. I was just questioning the number of nominations because last year we had some that nominated one set and others that nominated many.

10-4

 

[David O]

10-4

Hey Pat. I forgot to point out that we are only a little over 3 months away from the All In at the Alamo!!! Lazy Bill is still coming?

 

[moojersey]

Interested

 

[AK Chip]

Hey Pat. I forgot to point out that we are only a little over 3 months away from the All In at the Alamo!!! Lazy Bill is still coming?

I will call him and make sure he is still in. Bonnie has started looking into my ticket. Should have shortly!

 

[BGinGA]

I'd think that being able to nominate six sets should suffice to get an ample cross-section of good calendar candidates.... with a set needing to be nominated twice to make the voting list (sorta like being nominated and seconded). Three just seems like too few, and would likely create a much smaller pool of deserving candidates.

Once the voting list is fixed, letting each voter pick the 11 sets they prefer seems logical to me, with the top-11 vote-getters making the calendar (plus the HOF set).

All assuming that nominations and votes can only be cast by those who have committed to actually buying a calendar. Dunno how you police that though, since purchases are being handled directly through Shutterfly....

 

[DrDysfunctional]

I probably won't be able to vote. (I read a lot more than I post.)

But I'll still buy one.

 

[David O]

I probably won't be able to vote. (I read a lot more than I post.)

But I'll still buy one.

You can vote. Don't be so dysfunctional

 

[arch3r]

in

 

[Mac128k]

I'm in!

 

[slisk250]

The rules from last year worked fine. If it isn't broken, don't fix it.

If we get sets other than custom inlaid, then the masses have spoken.

 

[GIANTDustySquid]

can i get a calender for 2018?

 

[Pierna]

Am I still on time? I’d definitely like a calendar for 2018! I hope I’m not late:

 

[David O]

You are not too late. The calendar has been delay a bit due to a personal matter. I am trying to get to it but have not had a chance.

 

[WedgeRock]

I guess I haven't been explicit, but I'm in for a calendar too.

 

[RainmanTrail]

OK, put me down for a calendar as well if it's not too late

 

[dew4au]

Anyone who wants a calendar will be able to purchase them directly from shutterfly when it's done. We just need to finish one more month and then we will be ready to release the calendar for purchase.

Edit: ...and by finish one month, I mean complete the poll I started for the final set. Once it wraps up on Saturday, I should have everything ready to go Sunday.

 

[SWEATER]

in