^They need a big "NOPE o_O" button next to the "Vote Now"

^They need a big "NOPE o_O" button next to the "Vote Now"

That would be good lol

(Donbot, that Marloes set      )

February 26, 9pm

 

Sara Sampaio 21%

Emily Ratajkowski 21%

Samantha Hoopes 19%

Gigi Hadid 19%

Hannah Ferguson 10%

Cris Urena 5%

Marloes Horst 3%

 

February 27, 9pm

 

Sara Sampaio 30%

Hannah Ferguson 25%

Emily Ratajkowski 13%

Samantha Hoopes 13%

Gigi Hadid 11%

Cris Urena 4%

Good for Sara. She is deserving of the title rookie of the year. I think Lily was too though.

i fully expect that the percentages are not cumulative totals but just the percentages of the past 24 or so hours.  so to determine the cumulative total, it's perhaps best just to add up the percentages from all of the daily posts i've made, which have generally been around the same time of day. 

 

doing that, the totals look like this:

emily ratajkowski, 236

gigi hadid, 224

sara sampaio, 196

samantha hoopes, 141

hannah ferguson, 110

all other girls, below 100

 

however, this is just a simple average.  more likely there were more votes cast in the first few days that the website was up--in that case, the earlier percentages should count for more.  using the data from here, you can guess that the votes in the past few days are worth about half as much as the 18th and 19th.  as of now, that weighted approach doesn't change the rankings, but it may matter in the final four days if votes for gigi or sara really outnumber those for emrata.

 

by my math, gigi's percentages would have to be about 2.3 times emrata over the next four days.  sara's would have to be almost 9 times emrata.  so unless we see the percentages over the weekend shake out like that, i think we'll be saying congrats to emrata, ROTY 2014!

Out of curiosity, can you summarize the  number crunching that you believe will prove that Emily Rat will win?  I'm not following your train of thought.   

ok, let's say there are four options: blinky, inky, pinky, and clyde, and three days of voting. 

 

the percentages on each day look like this:

     day 1    2    3      3-day average

blinky  35  30  28    31

inky     30  32  34    32

pinky   20  18  16    18

clyde   15  20  22    19

 

so at first glance, inky wins!

 

but...what if there were actually  more votes cast on day 1 than on days 2 and 3...then all of a sudden blinky's early lead matters a lot more.  so depending on what assumptions you make about the number of votes on different days, blinky wins.

 

                             day 1         2        3        weighted average

blinky                         35%    30%    28%    32.2%

inky                            30%    32%    34%    31.3%

pinky                          20%    18%    16%    18.7%

clyde                          15%    20%    22%     17.8%

total number of votes 300    200     100  

 

does that make sense?  blinky's vote is like 35% times 300, plus 30% times 200, plus 28% times 100.  divide by 600 votes and you get 32.2%

 

(edit: the tables i tried to make didn't show up well)

You do all this, but the question remains that we don't know the methodology of the poll or  the total number of votes and the votes cast on each day.   

 

You say that it's updated every 24 hours? How do you know this? 

 

Thus I don't think we can extrapolate a prediction from this without getting the assumption verified.  

It does make sense, but I don't see why would they be publishing a daily percentage and not the total one for each one.

^They need a big "NOPE o_O" button next to the "Vote Now"

 

^

 

 

 

i'm just making assumptions.  i think it's fairly clear that the percentages aren't cumulative--there's no way they'd be moving around as much as we've seen.  emrata went from 21% after 9 days of voting to 13% on the 10th day.  there's virtually no way that happens in a cumulative vote.  so i'm assuming that they're over the last 24 to maybe 96 hours.  that part is hard to tell.

 

and yeah, we also don't know how many votes are being cast on each day, but i made some assumptions about that, too, once again using google trends to gauge interest over time.

Good for Sara. She is deserving of the title rookie of the year. I think Lily was too though.

 

I agree, Lily was best, but I can more than make do with Sara as the winner.  However, I still have a sneaky suspicion that more surprises are ahead.

It does make sense, but I don't see why would they be publishing a daily percentage and not the total one for each one.

To confuse the nerds on Bellazon?

The disclaimer that appeared when I voted (for Marloes..) actually encouraged repeated voting and claimed that they count all the votes, even if they were from a single source.

 

 This means that there is nothing stopping someone from, say, voting ten thousand times with a computer generated macro.

 

 

i'm just making assumptions.  i think it's fairly clear that the percentages aren't cumulative--there's no way they'd be moving around as much as we've seen.  emrata went from 21% after 9 days of voting to 13% on the 10th day.  there's virtually no way that happens in a cumulative vote.  so i'm assuming that they're over the last 24 to maybe 96 hours.  that part is hard to tell.

 

and yeah, we also don't know how many votes are being cast on each day, but i made some assumptions about that, too, once again using google trends to gauge interest over time.

 

so i was going thru the girls mentions, and i found this account: https://twitter.com/MontaigneF

he says he's been hacking the voting, is it possible?

^ Easily

then it looks like he's doing it again, cause emily just went from 13% to 21% this is ridiculous!!!! 

Stahp posting my Twitter. :persuazn:

Kidding of course. :morning:

You can set up a macro to record the physical actions you take to vote, and then remotely repeat the same processes on your PC.  The speed of the voting would then rely on the speed of your internet connection and how many times your computer auto-refreshes as the votes are counted (this is assuming of course, that the disclaimer is truthful and there is no caveat, like a 500 vote limit).  

 

So you can leave your PC on and it can vote by itself for a week....  

 

You are probably giving this braggart too much credit...if he's doing it then there are bound to be many others.

 

then it looks like he's doing it again, cause emily just went from 13% to 21% this is ridiculous!!!!