It’s like we’ve created a less productive version of the tragedy of the commons.
HA! I voted for 10% and got it to land at exactly 10%!
What do I win? 
I see that as things stand, our next possible “win point” is at 280.
I voted 50%
I was shocked at how close we were until I realized not everyone was voting blind like I did.
It would be interesting to see how close you can get with blind voting.
We’re pretty close now. 
I am the 50%
OK, everyone stand back. I’m going to register 89 sock puppets and get this done.
Sr. Olives is getting a kick out of this thread. He says that if we run a chi-square analysis on the results, we could not reject the null hypothesis that the numbers match.
I was Voter #250, and picked 20% since it had a 19.68% share at the time. This was the tally after I voted:
50% 122 48.80%
20% 50 20.00%
15% 37 14.80%
10% 25 10.00%
5% 16 6.40%
So 2 out of 5 categories were “perfect” at that point.
How would this be turning out if posters had to vote blind?
There’d be more votes for 5% than for 10%, apparently.
Needed:
To get 10% up to 32 (7 more right now)
15% to 48 (10 more)
20% to 64 (12 more)
50% to 160 (31 more)
NO 5% votes.
We can do this!
No we can’t.
5% is up to 18. NO ONE VOTE FOR 5%!!!
So now we need 10% to 36, 15% to 54, 20% to 72, and 50% to 180.
Probably not going to happen.
What we’ve proved is that more than 1 in 20 of us will both assume less that 1 in 20 of us would pick the 5% AND not look at current results before posting.
IOW at least 5% (6.67%?) of us are dumb as rocks. (Oh, okay, the first one is excused.)
Now 10% is too high as well. I know it doesn’t matter since 5% is relatively much more too high, but still…
Oh, reading the responses before voting is much less fun. I was all impressed with how close the numbers were but less so now.
BTW, I voted for 5 so um… oops?
Everybody thinks they are special.
Just voted for 15%, and brought that up to 14.95%.
I think next vote should be for 20%
OK, I voted 20%. Doesn’t look like it helped much though.