Best Song of 2000: Heat #7

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

Destiny's Child get their third qualifier, joined by All Saints, Mary Mary and Mystikal and Ladytron (thanks to a last-minute tick to beat Darude).

Today we have about equal measures of bosh, pop, indie and rap! You have until next Tuesday to vote. Get ticking!

• You get a maximum of TEN TICKS over the three bits of the poll. The top five will go through to the next stage.



• If you want to change your vote (or tick too many by mistake), you can edit your votes by clicking on 'Poll #12345' then 'Fill Out Poll'.



• UK chart placings given in brackets.



• Rep for your favourites in the comments!

[Poll #1421444]

Comments

[chezghost.livejournal.com]

How many more rounds for 2000 to go btw? I'm thinking we had too many nominations for this year and maybe should limit this for other years? Dunno what people prefer tho.

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

This is the penultimate one (whoops, meant to say that up top).

I'm going to reswizz the rules a little for 2001 and see how we go - maybe a maximum limit on nominations per person (say 40 or 50) and a maximum overall limit of 300. If there's still too many then I might ask people to second nominations.

However I want to keep the oddities and obscure songs that people really love - this is such a good way to find out lost treasures that people weren't paying attention to at the time.

[chezghost.livejournal.com]

i was gonna suggest maximum of 10 noms per person but maybe that's too few!

good point about lost treasures tho

[chuckeddy.livejournal.com]

a maximum limit on nominations per person (say 40 or 50) and a maximum overall limit of 300

Er, wouldn't this mean that it's possible only seven or eight people could offer nominations at all, if they each listed 40 or 50? That doesn't seem right, somehow. If the overall limit is 300, maybe the per-person should be a lot lower...(Also, I hope seconding other people's noms wouldn't count in one's limit, if you have to instigate a seconding rule. Seconding in polls like these always confuses me, anyway. Though I do see why you'd want to come up with some way to keep the numbers from getting out of hand, which is a foregone conclusion as the decade progresses.)

[chuckeddy.livejournal.com]

Well actually, 300 / 50 = 6, not 7 or 8. So that's even worse (than my division skills, even).

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

Judging by the last heat, there were a handful of people nomming tons of stuff and most people putting forward five or six max, but I see your point & agree that things will get trickier as the years progress. I will have a long hard think about it over the weekend :)

[meserach.livejournal.com]

So with this being the penultimate heat, that measn eight heats total and therefore a total forty songs that progress to the next round for 2000, yes?

How's that second round going to look? All forty in one big mega group, tick ten, top five sent to a one-vote-per-person final? Or something else?

Like bengraham above, though, I like the idea of a "high scoring losers"/wildcard mechanism to try and rectify any tragedies brought about by the alphabetical heats....

(in fact, with your permission and assuming you don't decide to do soemthing similar yourself, I might run a seperate, "unofficial" Second Chance Saloon poll for those acts that didn't quite make it?)

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

I was thinking of doing the next round after the other years so people don't get tick fatigue on the same songs (there was a fair bit of this on the Jop polls the other year).

I want to try and keep each poll (including the finals) to around 40 songs (ie an average 2CD Now compilation) so 8 heats with 5 qualifiers is ideal. However if it turns out there are 400 staggeringly good tracks for 2005 or something I reserve the right to change the rules at any time!

I wasn't planning to do any high scoring losers thing (much as it pains me to lose Darude) so feel free to do this! Maybe the overall winner of that could sneak through, I dunno. I'm a bit too hungover to think about this properly today :)