GMD Poll: Metallica's Albums Ranked

@Baroque @Vegard Pompey @Burkhard @RadicalThrasher @Sirjack

Did ya'll list a small number of albums because you don't like the others or because you don't know them? If you don't know them, leave it as is, but if you didn't list them because you don't like them, I recommend you add the others.

For context, if you list 6 albums, your 6th placed album gets 1 point and your 5th placed album gets 3 points; if you list 11 albums, your 6th placed album gets 6 points and your 5th placed album gets 7 points.

Why would you do the scoring that way? I listed those because I wanted the others to get zero points or the average of the missing lowest scores.
 
Nothing can get zero points

Yeah they can, but his scoring method is weird. It penalizes people for not listing the full discography too much. Leave out just one album and your voting power decreases by 11 points.

You should only forfeit 1 point by leaving the last album off. 1st should still get 11 points down to 10th getting 2 points. And then 11th would get 0 pts, or force the 1 point on it. If a person leaves out say 3 albums #9-11, then those remaining albums should get zero points or the average of what 9-11 would get, so 2 points each. But with his system you'd forfeit 30 points of voting power, wtf?
 
Last edited:
Yeah they can, but his scoring method is weird. It penalizes people for not listing the full discography too much. Leave out just one album and your voting power decreases by 11 points.

You should only forfeit 1 point by leaving the last album off. 1st should still get 11 points down to 10th getting 2 points. And then 11th would get 0 pts, or force the 1 point on it. If a person leaves out say 3 albums #9-11, then those remaining albums should get zero points or the average of what 9-11 would get, so 2 points each. But with his system you'd forfeit 30 points of voting power, wtf?

No, he has stated how his scoring works and no policy can get a zero because of how he does it.
 
It doesn't penalize people for not having heard all the albums, it incentivizes going ahead and listening to the albums you haven't heard yet.

If you haven't heard it and don't plan to, just list them dead last so your choices get a boost. It makes perfect sense to me.
 
Yeah they can, but his scoring method is weird. It penalizes people for not listing the full discography too much. Leave out just one album and your voting power decreases by 11 points.

You should only forfeit 1 point by leaving the last album off. 1st should still get 11 points down to 10th getting 2 points. And then 11th would get 0 pts, or force the 1 point on it. If a person leaves out say 3 albums #9-11, then those remaining albums should get zero points or the average of what 9-11 would get, so 2 points each. But with his system you'd forfeit 30 points of voting power, wtf?

You could just not be a bitch and follow the rules of the thread you know.
 
It doesn't penalize people for not having heard all the albums, it incentivizes going ahead and listening to the albums you haven't heard yet.

If you haven't heard it and don't plan to, just list them dead last so your choices get a boost. It makes perfect sense to me.

In what way is it beneficial to the results to have people ranking albums they have not heard? And in what way is it beneficial to be able to artificially boost your voting power? Looking at things objectively.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TechnicalBarbarity
That's a zero brah

If someone lists seven albums, he doesn't average out eleven albums. He only averages out the seven that person listed. If it were a zero, it would factor into the average. Prove to me this is happening using math.

His scoring is something like:

11-1 = 10

10/7 = 1 3/7 so that's the difference between each rank
 
If someone lists seven albums, he doesn't average out eleven albums. He only averages out the seven that person listed. If it were a zero, it would factor into the average. Prove to me this is happening using math.

His scoring is something like:

11-1 = 10

10/7 = 1 3/7 so that's the difference between each rank

He states that albums not listed are not affected positively or negatively.

Let x be a non listed album's score. If x is not positive and x is not negative, then x can only be zero (assuming x is a real number).

In addition cfloyd did not show fractions in his follow up explanation which is another issue here.
 
In addition cfloyd did not show fractions in his follow up explanation which is another issue here.

I guess you didn't read the Black Sabbath thread then

I edited the rules to allow for lists of 10 or more to be included. 9 or less still don't count. However, be aware that your first place album still gets 20 points and your last album still gets one point. The other scores are proportionate. For example, if you list 10 albums, your point distribution would like so:

1st: 20
2nd: 17.9
3rd: 15.8
4th: 13.7
5th: 11.6
6th: 9.5
7th: 7.4
8th: 5.3
9th: 3.2
10th: 1

How did you come up with those scores based on a list of 10? I'm trying to figure it out. Did you use an aggregate score or something?

20-1=19
The difference between first and last place)

19/9=2.111
Now you have an even amount that when subtracted 8 times will leave you with 1 for the last place. (I rounded to 2.1, which is why the difference between spots 9 and 10 is disproportionate by .1, but this should have a negligible impact).

QED
 
Last edited:
It looks like I confused the math teacher, who took the explaination very literally.

To be clarify, if you don't list an album its average points earned is not impacted positively or negatively and therefore, its ranking will not be impacted. For example:

-10 people vote
-6 people rank Hardwired
-4 people don't rank Hardwired

Hardwired's score will be:

Total points earned/6

NOT

Total points earned/10

The rationale behind this is:

1. To encourage people to rank all the albums they've heard and not just the ones they like

2. To not punish albums simply because they haven't been heard.

Of course, someone can subvert the system by listing the albums they haven't heard at the bottom, which I discourage. However, no system is perfect. The frequency with which that is likely to happen is way less than the frequency of people not listing a band's whole discography.

I thought my directions were clear, but if anyone has suggestions for revisions to make them clearer, I'm all ears.
 
From worst to best:

Death Magnetic
Hardwired...To Self Destruct
St. Anger
ReLoad
Load
Metallica
Ride the Lightning
Master of Puppets
Kill 'Em All
...And Justice For All

I'm listening to songs from The Black Album now, it's pretty underrated. Some of the songs are quite thrashy; they sound like discarded riffs from the Master of Puppets and 'Justice' sessions.
 
It looks like I confused the math teacher, who took the explaination very literally.

To be clarify, if you don't list an album its average points earned is not impacted positively or negatively and therefore, its ranking will not be impacted. For example:

Mathematically accurate rules should be taken very literally and require no "explaination"

"to be clarify", this is not how averages typically work. zeros are supposed to affect the average. you can define your own averages, but you create biases. This system does not find the best unbiased estimator of the average score.