Top 50 Missing www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / Top 50 Missing /

Top 50 missing - 2014 version

Page  Page 12 of 16:  « Previous  1  ...  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next »  
Author winterkjm
Registered
#166 | Posted: 8 Feb 2014 05:09 | Edited by: winterkjm 
Khuft:
20 seems like a good number. Selecting 20 is already difficult enough

Will this then be a Top 20 Missing list? Honestly, I think we might find we have near universal agreement on the "Top Tier" sites. Unless, that is if users throw in a home country nomination/favorite just to try to get it in. Which I do not plan on doing. None of my (3) original suggestions are Top 20, most of these 20 sites will be from the original list. Which makes 12 pages of suggestions and discussion (Top 50 missing - 2014 version) largely meaningless.

I can see Solivigants logic, just voting for all 50 makes more sense to me, or maybe (40). Otherwise, about 80% of this list we just made is a pointless exercise. We all know most of these sites are not Top 20.

Author elsslots
Admin
#167 | Posted: 8 Feb 2014 05:27 
winterkjm:
Top 20 Missing list

It's the Top 50 Missing of us all combined. But to get there, you don't need to have 50 votes each. If you vote for a parliament you only have 1 vote, and still this results in 150 members of parliament.

Author elsslots
Admin
#168 | Posted: 8 Feb 2014 05:34 
In addition to the above: it's also how you define "Missing". Most of the list of 119 are as good as the lower levels of the 981 sites of the WH List. But I don't want to compare these sites with the Queretaro's, Beemster Polder's or other lucky ones that got in somehow. It's the top we're talking about: of which is it a shame that they haven't made it in, even sometimes haven't made a T-List?

Author winterkjm
Registered
#169 | Posted: 8 Feb 2014 05:48 | Edited by: winterkjm 
That's certainly a fair point.

I am definitely willing to try, I just wonder how different our Top 20 will really be (if we're honest). The more uniform our lists are, the greater likelihood of random/favorite (unworthy) nominations finding there way in with 1-2 votes beyond 20, no? Maybe, I am just unfamiliar with the voting style and thinking too much about possible difficulties.

Do you feel there will be a lot of voters and will the survey be posted on the front webpage? If so, I think this approach may work very well. But we've only had (16) individuals who participated in the suggestion/discussion process. Most of these individuals are from Europe (or English speaking countries), and I wonder how different our Top 20 will be.

Author elsslots
Admin
#170 | Posted: 8 Feb 2014 06:29 
winterkjm:
Do you feel there will be a lot of voters

That's the other variable indeed. If we have a lot of voters (say 100+), I think you will get good results with 20 votes each. If we have less voters, we need more votes each.

As we have discussed before, anybody on the user list of the general website can vote. That's 440 people. We plan to reach out to them by e-mail. Meltwaterfalls and I are still discussing some logistics.

Author Solivagant
Registered
#171 | Posted: 8 Feb 2014 07:55 | Edited by: Solivagant 
winterkjm:
Which makes 12 pages of suggestions and discussion (Top 50 missing - 2014 version) largely meaningless.


I certainly don't think so!! I, for one, have enjoyed the interchanges and learnt quite a lot about a number of interesting sites - irrespective of how they fare in any vote(s). As I have said before, the current list of potential "Top 50" uninscribed sites, put together by a group of knowledgeable people coming from different viewpoints and parts of the World (even if not as comprehensively as one might hope), has value in itself.

Author winterkjm
Registered
#172 | Posted: 8 Feb 2014 12:00 | Edited by: winterkjm 
Well I certainly enjoyed the activity! Ultimately, very few suggestions will make it on the list. Most, will be those famous sites we already knew about. I am encouraged about the possibilty of such mass participation of those involved in this website, I am excited to begin voting.

There is an interesting element to our process. We began creating this inventory through debate and discussion between 16 knowledgable individuals, much like a committee. The "missing" sites will be selected by popular vote. In some ways this is the reverse of how UNESCO insribes sites.

On a side note, a thank you is in order for Els and Meltwaterfalls for making this vote a reality. While I have shared some doubts about voting procedures, my concern only reflects my interest in this process.

Author meltwaterfalls
Registered
#173 | Posted: 8 Feb 2014 12:16 
Sorry I'm away at the moment just keeping logged in.

One caveat is that Survey Monkey has a limit of 100 responses on the free version of Survey Monkey.

I will have a hunt around and see what I can turn up.

Sorry I won't be on here much over the weekend, but should be up to speed on Monday.

Author elsslots
Admin
#174 | Posted: 8 Feb 2014 12:20 
meltwaterfalls:
One caveat is that Survey Monkey has a limit of 100 responses on the free version of Survey Monkey.

I sent you an email about that, meltwaterfalls! Has probably ended up at your work email account, so let's wait til Monday

Author kkanekahn
Registered
#175 | Posted: 10 Feb 2014 09:13 | Edited by: kkanekahn 
Is it possible to include only the sites which have more than 4/5 votes so that we will not confined to a number.
elsslots:
As we have discussed before, anybody on the user list of the general website can vote. That's 440 people.


I doubt that many of the 540 will not vote. Some of them may not be active now.

Author kkanekahn
Registered
#176 | Posted: 10 Feb 2014 09:22 
elsslots:
By this we mean this list of people: http://www.worldheritagesite.org/allusers.php

So if you're on this Forum and haven't subscribed to the general website to add reviews etc, please do that now so you can vote. It requires another logon id.


I have subscribed to both forum and that list. But,my name is not in that list

Author elsslots
Admin
#177 | Posted: 10 Feb 2014 12:52 
kkanekahn:
But,my name is not in that list

Thanks for reporting this. There was an error with the most recent subscriptions. The list is longer now!

Author kkanekahn
Registered
#178 | Posted: 10 Feb 2014 13:39 
elsslots:
It's the Top 50 Missing of us all combined.


In the 1st missing list we have 61 sites. All will agree that the new nominations are better and wider(as it includes prev list). Therefore, it would be better if we go for more than 61 (may be 75). I prefer one will vote only 20.

Author elsslots
Admin
#179 | Posted: 11 Feb 2014 00:33 
We will have a list looking like this http://www.worldheritagesite.org/allvsites.php
So you can cut it off wherever you like.
I am working on it. It seemed better to handle then a free surveymonkey account

Author kkanekahn
Registered
#180 | Posted: 11 Feb 2014 02:03 
elsslots:
We will have a list looking like this http://www.worldheritagesite.org/allvsites.php


Can we restrict one member to only 20 sites in it ? Otherwise some will vote more than 20 like the no. of visits. If we can restrict then its good.

Page  Page 12 of 16:  « Previous  1  ...  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next » 
Top 50 Missing www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / Top 50 Missing / Top 50 missing - 2014 version Top

Your Reply Click this icon to move up to the quoted message

 

 ?
Only registered users are allowed to post here. Please, enter your username/password details upon posting a message, or register first.
 
 
  www.worldheritagesite.org Forum Powered by Chat Forum Software miniBB ®