# Mathematics Award

## Mathematics Award

56 vote(s)
63.6%

15 vote(s)
17.0%

6 vote(s)
6.8%

6 vote(s)
6.8%

2 vote(s)
2.3%

11 vote(s)
12.5%

3 vote(s)
3.4%

5 vote(s)
5.7%

8 vote(s)
9.1%

9 vote(s)
10.2%

5 vote(s)
5.7%

22 vote(s)
25.0%

12 vote(s)
13.6%
14. ### Zinq

3 vote(s)
3.4%
1. Dec 14, 2016

### Greg Bernhardt

This award will go to the member the community feels has the most positive effect in the mathematics forums. This is a popular vote. All nominations are rewards in and of themselves. Active Mentors and past winners are not eligible. Comments and write-ins are welcome.

2. Dec 15, 2016

### Greg Bernhardt

Congrats to:
We know this list could be 3x longer!

Last edited: Dec 17, 2016
3. Dec 16, 2016

### Demystifier

How is it possible that @micromass did not win last year? Is it because he was not eligible because he won the year before?

4. Dec 16, 2016

### Staff: Mentor

Quite sure that he won in 2014, yes.

5. Dec 17, 2016

@Greg Bernhardt You might want to check the arithmetic algorithm you are using to compute the percentages. You now have @micromass with 63% of the vote when two others have over 20%. I think switching to as many as 3 votes per member changed the arithmetic somehow.

6. Dec 17, 2016

Could it be that is how two candidates in the presidential election can both claim to have over 50% of the vote? LOL

7. Dec 17, 2016

### Staff: Mentor

63% of all people who voted gave micromass a vote (one out of a maximum of 3).
20% of all people who voted gave PeroK a vote (one out of a maximum of 3).

Adding numbers for several candidates doesn't lead to a useful result any more (well, you can calculate the average number of votes per participant).

8. Dec 17, 2016