Huh. Had I known that rule, I probably would have left it a no-vote anyway.
Flames wouldn't be eternal if they actually consumed anything.
Lilah ,'Not Fade Away'
Bureaucracy 3: Oh, so now you want to be part of the SOLUTION?
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
Gris - Oct 20, 2004 2:55:10 am PDT #2532 of 10001
Hey. New board.
Topic!Cindy - Oct 20, 2004 3:04:14 am PDT #2533 of 10001
What is even happening?
Huh. Had I known that rule, I probably would have left it a no-vote anyway.
Why? So we could talk about it again?
Topic!Cindy - Oct 20, 2004 4:33:14 am PDT #2534 of 10001
What is even happening?
Maybe we need a PSA (in Press?) to newer members, about the reasons behind the "no preference" option on our ballots?
I'm too gronky to even begin to think what it should say, but should there be something?
Lyra Jane - Oct 20, 2004 5:17:53 am PDT #2535 of 10001
Up with the sun
Shouldn't the Closing Previously vote note that further discussion will be in the still-open Angel thread? I know that, but not everyone has really been following all the whyfores and goings on, and it might not be clear.
See, I agree with that, but I didn't think of it and no one mentioned it before the vote went up. But I don't think it's a big enough deal to edit the ballot over -- worst-case scenario, people get confused enough that Angel Previously isn't archived, and we have a dead thread sitting around until we can vote on it again.
Maybe we need a PSA (in Press?) to newer members, about the reasons behind the "no preference" option on our ballots?
Couldn't hurt. I can't do clever, but something like, "Buffista ballots include the "no preference" option because some people may want to vote on one or more issues on a ballot, but not care about others. In addition, we have a quorum of 42 votes required for a ballot to count, so some people vote "no preference" just to ensure we don't fall short of that. "No preference" votes aren't counted as either yeses or nos, and the choice with the majority of the votes outside the "no preferences" still wins."
Also, did we ever figure out what would happen if "no preference" got a majority?
brenda m - Oct 20, 2004 5:20:49 am PDT #2536 of 10001
If you're going through hell/keep on going/don't slow down/keep your fear from showing/you might be gone/'fore the devil even knows you're there
Also, did we ever figure out what would happen if "no preference" got a majority?
This:
>the choice with the majority of the votes outside the "no preferences" still wins."
would still apply.
Topic!Cindy - Oct 20, 2004 5:21:01 am PDT #2537 of 10001
What is even happening?
Couldn't hurt. I can't do clever, but something like, "Buffista ballots include the "no preference" option because some people may want to vote on one or more issues on a ballot, but not care about others. In addition, we have a quorum of 42 votes required for a ballot to count, so some people vote "no preference" just to ensure we don't fall short of that. "No preference" votes aren't counted as either yeses or nos, and the choice with the majority of the votes outside the "no preferences" still wins."
That sounds good, although (and I learned this in the hardest of ways) you really mean "most votes" rather than (the current definition of) "majority."
Also, did we ever figure out what would happen if "no preference" got a majority?
It's not an issue. Say we have 100 people vote on this ballot, and for question #1, 90 vote "no-preference", 6 vote "no", and 4 vote "yes". The "no" votes win. There were still 42 or more votes on the issue. Of those votes that expressed an opinion, more were saying "no" than were saying "yes".
Nilly - Oct 20, 2004 5:22:55 am PDT #2538 of 10001
Swouncing
Jon B. - Oct 20, 2004 5:48:22 am PDT #2539 of 10001
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
That sounds good, although (and I learned this in the hardest of ways) you really mean "most votes" rather than (the current definition of) "majority."
If there's only two choices outside of the No Preferences, then "most votes" is the same thing as "majority". t /pedant
Dana - Oct 20, 2004 5:49:13 am PDT #2540 of 10001
I'm terrifically busy with my ennui.
Oh, hey, I was wondering what happened to CheeseButt. Cool.
billytea - Oct 20, 2004 5:50:05 am PDT #2541 of 10001
You were a wrong baby who grew up wrong. The wrong kind of wrong. It's better you hear it from a friend.
If there's only two choices outside of the No Preferences, then "most votes" is the same thing as "majority".
Only if by 'majority' you mean "majority of non-'no preference' votes, rather than majority of votes cast.