I didn’t approve. I was just making a funny
So… if you’re down and four hours passes, you’re out? Or is it only for advancing to play another track?
I think it should be what the final count is at the time
1 Like
Yep this. If it’s sitting on 8-2 for hours, that should get through. Only do it when little chance of a comeback. If it’s 7-8 it’s on until the bitter end.
What if it’s like 1-2?
Has that ever happened? There’s allways a few people hovering over the thread awaiting the chance to voice their displeasure.
Yeh, I think we’d have to shut the thread down if that happened.
Getting overly complicated. Just whoever’s in front after five hours except between 11pm and 7am AEST or first to ten votes. Still complicated.
Nah. That’s too messy/complicated. I still think the 7-vote is the best option. ATM it’s 10-8 in favour of changing to a 7-vote. Is that enough support to make the change?
I hope so.
We’ve been waiting nine hours for a result for Wimmera’s last song. With a 7-vote he would’ve been playing his next song four hours ago.
1 Like
I again put forward the idea of ‘4 in front after 5’
So -
5-1
6-2
7-3
8-4
9-5
10-whatever
First to 1 for mine
2 Likes
I agree with you, Kira.
I think a compromise could be as follows:
10-10 remains (but within a set timeframe). 1-2 songs per day is massively boring for mine.
Say the thread is active from 7 a.m. - 10 p.m. (so 15 hours). A song has 5 hours to reach an outcome (using 10-10) after being spun, otherwise it reverts to 7-7. If 7-7 fails to reach an outcome after 5 hours - then the thread is FUBAR (but we could still go with the vote total after 5 hours).
A minimum of 3 songs per day would be spun using this system.
Anyway, I’m outta here for a few weeks. Catch you in late August.
1 Like
I’ll support any option that increases the song rate—your option, first-to-seven, 4-after-5. Whatever 
I like the idea of a dictator KoK (a “DiK”). I think PP2 suggested it as a joke. But having a DiK who could sack DJs if things got too slow would fix the problem and be fun
Who cares now that Essendon’s winning.
I care 
5 Likes
My system retains the 10-10 voting (which 44% of punters wanted), but with a time-out option - that brings the 7-7 vote option (56% supported) into effect. Best of both worlds. Today has been good fun, but Hambo’s set was torturous.
p.s. The 5-hour (or less) limit would also (potentially) encourage faster voting. It may shift those sitting on the fence with the ‘let someone else save (or slay) him/her’ - especially if the DJ is gunna be timed out on a vote total anyway (and get through or fall short).
1 Like
7-7 for mine. Anytime. I like the 4-after-5 concept, but one fun DJ King thing it takes away is the comeback. 7-7 partially does too, but the gains in more songs more DJs more turns are worth it.
More turns/songs means more risks means more fun or out-there songs that could see you outsed but you might only have to wait a week or two to go again. More themed sets possibly as well.
I’m a staunch 7-7 supporter, but there was no consensus. I reckon a system that builds in both voting options would work. Soz, my Supreme Court negotiation training is shining through here. Hope a compromised approach is considered, otherwise 10-10 most likely stays.
For this reason, I’m not a fan of the 4 after 5 concept.
1 Like
Weren’t you going somewhere?
See you in a few weeks.
We’ll have it sorted by then.
4-after5 
2 Likes