[Luanda]

[rquote=2555124&tid=146645&author=Shasown][rquote=2555059&tid=146645&author=Luanda][rquote=2555034&tid=146645&author=Shasown]Didn't need to use google, but I tell you what will bow to your obvious superior Knowledge (not) if you can show me a page with words or wording like that. Go on bet you can't!

With the figures that were given you would also need other figures to work from in order to produce an effective series of weighted figures. Like the total number of votes cast and at least one of the two inital figues cast for either 5th or 4th place or the total figure of votes cast at the time of the first count, this would then allow a multiplier(thats technically incorrect as in even the best possible case with all figures freely available it would be a variable to be applied to the given % figures for each stage)

In the particular case of the figures released on BBO it would appear the "weight" was what the poster thought just so long as the numbers added up to about 100. [/rquote]

You failed to mention time restrictions which are the main constituent in this equation. Obviously some voting lines closed before others and that is the reason for the weightings.

Scotched. [/rquote]

Time restrictions dont need to be taken into account in the equation for cumulative totals and contributory comparisons, , they are the reason for adjusting the percentages. Dullard.[/rquote]

We have to disagree there, Shasown, as I think it is blindingly obvious that the weighting is necessary only because of time restrictions, there is no reason whatsoever to weight the total votes cast as they are constants.

By the way;

,,