Second Guess
 
Rules and instructions.
 
Second
Guess is a game, a bit of fun for political anoraks. The aim is to use the
wisdom of crowds to guess which MPs will support which other MPs for leadership
or deputy leadership of the Labour Party.
 
The
principle is that we all have a little bit of information. Whether it is
rumour, hearsay, gossip, intuition or we have read it in the paper, we all know
that potential leaders of the Labour Party have “camps” of supporters – and
this is a way of collating all the information we have in one place.
 
Instructions
 - Register. Please
     tell us some information about yourself so we can run interesting and fun
     statistics on the basis of your second guesses. Don’t forget to press
     submit when you are done.
 
 - Under “My Choices”
     select in order the top five Labour MPs, in order of preference, whom you
     would like to see as the next leader of the
     Labour Party. We use this information, together with your profile
     information, to extrapolate the electoral college.
     Don’t forget to press “Update Selection” when you are done.
 
 - Now enter your
     Second Guesses. You have to guess which MPs will nominate which other MPs
     for Leader of the Labour Party. Browse the tabbed system for the name of
     the nominating MP and double-click on their name. Then browse for the
     nominee and single-click on  their name. Then use the dropdown
     to select a confidence value – 1 for a guess to 5 if you know something as
     a fact. Then click “Update” to enter your second guess.
 
 - To see how the MPs
     nominations and the Electoral College is panning
     out, go to “Home” and you will see the statistics. Only MPs with
     nominations from at least 12.5% of their colleagues go through to the Electoral
     College stage of a leadership or deputy leadership election.
 
 
Rules
 - OK there’s a prize
     so there have to be rules. I, Alexander Hilton, will give £500 to the
     person who correctly guesses the most number of MP nominations for leader
     of the Labour Party in the election subsequent to the retirement of Tony
     Blair.
 
 - I will weight
     guesses so that they are more likely to win you the prize, the earlier
     they are made.
 
 - There is no entry
     fee for this competition (though donations are welcome).
 
 - Nominations shall
     be judged valid if they are tabled to the party in support of a candidate.
     Nominations of candidates who do not achieve the support of 12.5% of the
     PLP will also be judged valid if they are verifiable and not in conflict
     with a nomination of a valid candidate
 
 - I reserve the
     right to close this competition at any time. I reserve the right to change
     and or amend the rules at any time to take into account the integrity of
     the data or the procedures determined by the Labour Party NEC or for any
     other reason.
 
 - In determining the
     winner of this competition, Alexander Hilton is the judge and the judge’s
     decision is final.
 
 - In the event of a
     tie, the prize will be split between the winners.
 
 - The Winners agree
     to take part in reasonable publicity organised  by Alexander Hilton or
     Labourhome.org.
 
 
 
How does the data achieve any sense of reliability?
 
OK
– so how do we know that the bad information isn’t outweighing the good? Well
firstly, we ask people what their preferences are for Leader or Deputy Leader –
a selection we use to calculate the rest of the Electoral College. Secondly, we
have a prize – so there are two reasons to put in what you think is true rather
than what you wish were true. The first being that we have
given you an outlet to express your own wishes and the second being a financial
motive to be correct.
 
The
last element of “goodness” in the data comes as the data achieves critical
mass. If you imagine True and False being on a grey-scale where 0 = False and 1 = True, the rumour might have a value of 0.1 and gossip 0.2. Something read in
a paper might have a value of 0.5 to 0.8 depending on the paper. Getting the
information from the horse’s mouth as it were, would be worth 0.9 or 1.
 
However,
there is no corresponding scale of falseness in negatives. The most false you
can get is 0 in value – so eventually, there is enough “Truth” in the system to
make the data interesting and for it to have some reliability.
 
Any
enquiries should be directed to:
Alexander
Hilton
alexhilton@gmail.com
07985
384 859