The patent badge is an abbreviated version of the USPTO patent document. The patent badge does contain a link to the full patent document.
The patent badge is an abbreviated version of the USPTO patent document. The patent badge covers the following: Patent number, Date patent was issued, Date patent was filed, Title of the patent, Applicant, Inventor, Assignee, Attorney firm, Primary examiner, Assistant examiner, CPCs, and Abstract. The patent badge does contain a link to the full patent document (in Adobe Acrobat format, aka pdf). To download or print any patent click here.
Patent No.:
Date of Patent:
Jul. 23, 2013
Filed:
May. 28, 2009
Michael A. Morgia, Watertown, NY (US);
Pat A. Fontana, Jr., Watertown, NY (US);
Alex M. Morgia, Watertown, NY (US);
Pat A. Fontana, Sr., Watertown, NY (US);
Ralph E. Roland, Ellicott City, MD (US);
Shawn M. Davis, Clarksville, MD (US);
Mark M. Piwowarski, Ellicott City, MD (US);
John P. Gaus, Watertown, NY (US);
Michael A. Morgia, Watertown, NY (US);
Pat A. Fontana, Jr., Watertown, NY (US);
Alex M. Morgia, Watertown, NY (US);
Pat A. Fontana, Sr., Watertown, NY (US);
Ralph E. Roland, Ellicott City, MD (US);
Shawn M. Davis, Clarksville, MD (US);
Mark M. Piwowarski, Ellicott City, MD (US);
John P. Gaus, Watertown, NY (US);
Watertown Software, Inc., Watertown, NY (US);
Abstract
A system and method for algorithmic selection of a consensus from a collection of ideas is disclosed. A group of ideas is provided to a group of participants for voting. Voting may occur in a single round or in several successive rounds, optionally until a consensus idea is chosen. Typically, the votes that are cast use discrete levels, such as 'approve', 'disapprove', “positive”, “neutral” or “negative”. For ideas that receive the same votes, a differentiator may be the time spent casting the vote. A relatively long evaluation time may signal some internal conflict in the mind of the participant, when compared with a relatively short evaluation time, which may signal no such conflict. The evaluation time may be combined with the rating of the participant to form a weighted rating. Consequently, a short evaluation time of a positive rating may yield a more positive weighted rating, while a short evaluation time of a negative rating may yield a more negative weighted rating.