Entries are ordered roughly based on the number of times the photographer has won previous contests. The idea is that frequent winners will be going up against other frequent winners rather than newcomers in group voting. 1-2 winners from each group (depending on how many groups there are) will then go on to the final vote.
Just curious, for grouping this way, with previous winners going against previous winners in preliminary rounds, how do you calculate? Is it the amount of times you win top photo, or the total amount of times you place in the top 3? If the later shouldnt the likes of Gdad and Deb (sorry dont know the keystroke of mickey ears) be in the same heat? I looked over 2007/08 contests and by quick glance they seem to make the top 3 the most. Then looking at the Valentines groupings, they are not in the same group. Can you clarify how you make your decision on heats?
The goal is to encourage participation and see as many newcomers in the final voting as possible. Regardless of how they are grouped, I still think the same 3 photos will finish 1st, 2nd and 3rd but it's good to see others getting some acknowledgment for their work.
I agree with you for wanting to encourage participation. But I also feel, as we have discussed, it is not an all or nothing competetion. I want to thank rtphokie for bringing back the top three winners in the contests. For those that do not know me, I can be a very competitive photographer. I have competed at the local/state/federation levels. Yes, I love getting top honor, but when I look at my competition, sometimes its just an honor to be in their company. So to me, its not all about #1. I am sure there are some new participants out there, who would be honored to be a runner up to Gdad, Deb, Sha and some of our other frequent winners. That being said, with our contest, I do not always believe that the best photos will win. Why, simply put there are no limits on voting. Someone can have all their family and DIS friends vote for them regardless of photographic merit, putting them into a win, place or show. I believe most of the time, photographic merit will win, but not always.
Background:
The order photos appear in the group voting shouldn't matter but it does.
Personally, I like either random, or order of entry. But, I may be in a unique situation. My spouse and my mother both enter. I dont necessarily like going up directly against them and vice versa. So to me the order of voting does matter for personal reasons.
Looking back over the group polls, the first and last groups tend to get the most votes, the ones in the middle (especially the next to the last group, usually group 3) tend to get the least votes. I cant believe that the photos in these groups are consistently uninteresting to voters. Are voters getting tired of voting in all these polls? Each week we submit a photo, vote in 4 or more group polls and then vote in a final poll. It's almost as much work to participate in the photo contests as it is to run them even if you never enter one.
Could this go back to my theory on no limits to voting? With JoShmoe, having his/her spouse, kids, inlaws, cousin it, and friends voting for them regardless of photographic merit. Ideally, and I know this cannot work with the DIS, would be scale voting. Vote on a 1-10 scale with commentary. With the highest average score winning. IS anyone familiar with DPChallnge? Thats kinda what I am trying to explain. With pick one winner, it goes to the all or nothing. But that is how it is. The DIS only allows one type of poll. So we are limited.
Another idea:
What would you folks think about doing just 1 round of voting instead of 2? This would require moving the voting process off this board. Instead of posting a group poll, I'd post a link to my website which will display all entries and allow voting in one step. Once voting is complete (folowing the same Monday to Sunday schedule), winners would be posted on the board. We'd still use the board for posting entries, photos would still be hosted by individuals (using photobucket, smugmug, etc) just the voting location would change.
Doing it this way would make voting simpler and faster, less work for me (it takes a minimum of 30 minutes to post all those polls due to board restrictions) and give us the ability to vote on some superlatives as well (best representation of the theme, best use of color, best entry from a Canon camera (just kidding), best entry by a newbie, best entry by a kid, etc.)
What do you folks think? Is this worth trying for a while or are folks happy with the multi week, multi thread voting? I'm happy to do whatever the consensus is.
I personally do not like this suggestion, greater risk of favoritism playing over photo merit.
But I'm not sure this has anything to do with my competitive streak. I just like it better when there are a bunch of distinctive images in the final poll, and it's all about what I like.
Either way, it is working nicely now so if I am right, then people will vote in all the groups and if I'm wrong, well... it wouldn't be the first time. 
- I am very much a creature of habit! 
