Liese, I read it as individual votes on three separate new threads. If all three had passed, we'd have three new spoiler threads, on top of the one we have.
Right. Sir. Honey.
Zoe ,'The Train Job'
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
DXMachina - Nov 07, 2004 12:46:21 pm PST #2847 of 10001
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
aurelia - Nov 07, 2004 1:09:24 pm PST #2848 of 10001
All sorrows can be borne if you put them into a story. Tell me a story.
I wondered about the possibility of ending up with three different spoiler light threads when I read the ballot.
Jon B. - Nov 07, 2004 1:36:48 pm PST #2849 of 10001
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
If all three had passed, we'd have three new spoiler threads, on top of the one we have.
le nubian implied that if that happened, she'd examine the data and propose another vote to settle it.
Topic!Cindy - Nov 07, 2004 1:38:43 pm PST #2850 of 10001
What is even happening?
I asked about that, because this ballot was very different than ones we've done in the past. le nubian said:
I'm an academic, so I'd prefer to collect the most data and then deal with the results later. I can't think of another way to do it that would address the Hard Core Spoiler people and the Hard Core Lite people.
This gives people as much choice as they desire and if this nets too many recommended threads, then we can deal with that in another week.
In some ways, I feel that the administrative issue and what people want are two different things that need to be dealt with in separate instances. If people see this as REALLY problematic, I can change the poll again.le nubian "Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!" Nov 3, 2004 4:46:24 am PST
Xpost w/Jon
DXMachina - Nov 07, 2004 1:50:49 pm PST #2851 of 10001
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
I'm going to start off by saying the balloting is done, and we had a single choice. I have no problem with either that, that there were multiple choices, or the outcome. Here's the thing.
This gives people as much choice as they desire and if this nets too many recommended threads, then we can deal with that in another week.
Nowhere in the ballot was it mentioned that we were voting on preferences or recommendations, or that it was an elaborate poll. The way we've set things up, if pluralities had chosen all three options, we'd have three threads, and we wouldn't be able to change that for six months, not a week. Not everybody reads the entire lightbulb thread before voting. I didn't. I think in the future, if there's any kind of unfinished business attached to a choice or choices on the ballot, it ought to be stated on the ballot.
Topic!Cindy - Nov 07, 2004 2:48:12 pm PST #2852 of 10001
What is even happening?
Not everybody reads the entire lightbulb thread before voting. I didn't. I think in the future, if there's any kind of unfinished business attached to a choice or choices on the ballot, it ought to be stated on the ballot.I agree. I had a lot of issues with how the final ballot was structured. How do we enforce that though (or even be on watch for it), when not everyone reads through lightbulb? One of the issues in this case, was that the proposer was new to the process, and so not only did she have to decide which suggestions (content-wise) she should incorporate, she also had to deal with structure suggestions, and at some point, the two sort of over-lapped.
I knew I'd already worn out my welcome in the conversation, and so I decided it was time to shut up, figuring either I was worried about something nobody else seemed to be worried about (frequently the case), or that someone else would take up the cause. Isn't this a case of skip-at-your-own-peril?
§ ita § - Nov 07, 2004 2:51:30 pm PST #2853 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
How do we enforce that though (or even be on watch for it), when not everyone reads through lightbulb?
I don't think you can enforce a thing. In the end, if LeN had decided to submit a proposal about what sort of sandwich she was to have for lunch, and a poorly phrased one at that, so be it.
Liese S. - Nov 07, 2004 3:04:48 pm PST #2854 of 10001
"Faded like the lilac, he thought."
Okay, I'm fine with it. Sorry for stirring the pot. It all came out to a conclusion that could be implemented, and the proposer had the right to phrase the ballot any way she pleased. I was just mildly befuddled because I thought I had understood the ballot one way before and after implementation understood it another (clearly the intended) way.
le nubian - Nov 07, 2004 4:09:28 pm PST #2855 of 10001
"And to be clear, I am the hell. And the high water."
Cindy,
well if you had issues with it, I would have liked to hear it. Hearing about it after that fact doesn't do much good.
le nubian - Nov 07, 2004 4:13:10 pm PST #2856 of 10001
"And to be clear, I am the hell. And the high water."
I just don't know what the ballot should have looked like. It was way too difficult trying to accomodate the most people possible.
Sorry if the ballot was fucked up but that was the only thing I could think of that didn't wholesale alienate anyone.