Crossword Help Forum
Forum Rules

I think it is up to the setter whether to take this into account or not (I might if I didn't think there was a clear winner).

btw I do think you made the right choice last week, aristo!

Various games do have automatic tie-breakers, but that of course doesn't mean that this one must. I just thought I'd run it past you. So gallant, chrise. :)

Aristo and chrise, how about when voting a 1st and 2nd are indicated and in the event of a tie the entry with more 2nds is declared the winner. It could still result in a tie but much less likely.

....but correct! (I said on the other thread that it was only the "tits" that garnered my votes - not a classy way of winning).

Hi ginge
STV? The LibDems didn't get it through! I don't think we need to change the current system.

I think that might be a bit messy for the judge, ginge. I for one am always retallying to make sure I have SINGLE votes right, but it's so easy to see the totals next to each setter's name.

Hi chrise, certainly not my politics. I thought given the sample size it would nearly always provide a winner and would result in more clues receiving an acknowledgement giving encouragement to setters perhaps otherwise feeling their effort was unappreciated.

It would indeed, ginge. I guess I'm just lazy.

I sympathise though, aristo - I remember how difficult it is to count valid votes from valid voters!