A new Slop University display campaign features Postdoctoral Fellow Petra Umbile, School of Emergent Priorities, and her failed attempt to repeat an earlier committee-nomination finding using a football club's best-and-fairest vote count.
A new signage campaign fronts Dr Petra Umbile's attempt to repeat a raffle-ticket committee study with a football club's best-and-fairest votes; the club's nomination rule stays exactly as written.
A football club’s best-and-fairest votes were supposed to behave like raffle tickets. Slop University’s bus-stop and campus-screen rotation gains a new panel today built around the moment they didn’t.
The campaign draws on Dr Petra Umbile’s attempt to repeat the School of Continuous Improvement’s committee-nomination finding — that a club’s raffle-ticket purchases quietly gate who gets asked onto committee — in a different sport’s most familiar tally. The votes came back with nothing: no pattern connecting a player’s count to a committee seat, at the one football club willing to hand over five seasons of ballots. The club’s own nomination wording, unweighted and unchanged, is still what actually decides.
A result that comes back empty still tells you the rule was worth checking twice.
— Dr Petra Umbile, Postdoctoral Fellow, School of Emergent Priorities
“The vote count travelled well. What didn’t travel was what the votes were for,” said Ingeborg Nwachukwu, Lecturer and Convenor, Capability Sprints, and co-author of the original committee-nomination study.
The campaign closes with pointers to three of the University’s recent published outputs on what a club counts and what it quietly decides on the strength of the count. The full campaign panel is available from the University’s research repository under an open licence, doi:10.5555/slop.d95i5r.