The other thing is, are their more buffistas voting now, and should we consider upping the minimum from 42? We had about 100 active buffistas at the time IIRC.
Captain was looking for a pilot. I found a husband. Seemed to work out.
Zoe ,'Bushwhacked'
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
Sophia Brooks - Jul 17, 2007 5:10:56 am PDT #9898 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
Jon B. - Jul 17, 2007 5:19:56 am PDT #9899 of 10001
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
What would happen in the case of something like the two-part ballot that Kat linked to if Question One had a result that required an answer from Question Two but question Two didn't have MVT results? If, hypothetically, enough of the No Preference voters had just skipped that question?
Anarchy!
Seriously, I think that is very unlikely to occur.
JenP - Jul 17, 2007 5:20:20 am PDT #9900 of 10001
How did the number 42 get chosen (other than the obvious...) Was there some sort of mathiness involved WRT havign 100 or so active posters? Are there more active posters now?
Sophia Brooks - Jul 17, 2007 5:22:17 am PDT #9901 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
Nilly, et als, I have a dumb question-- how does one navigate to the lawspeak document? I can never find it easily?
JenP-- from the lawspeak document, it looks like we had everyone write down the number they thought and averaged them,
[We have] a minimum number of community members voting on any item in order for the vote to count. (Press #367) How many Buffistas does it take to make a vote count? 42. This was taken as an average of voted suggestions. Mean, median and "binary walk" methods of averaging were compared, and all tended to come close enough to 42 for horseshoes and hand grenades. Votes of "no preference" count toward this [Minimum Voter Turnout]. (Press #415)
Dana - Jul 17, 2007 5:24:28 am PDT #9902 of 10001
"I'm useless alone." // "We're all useless alone. It's a good thing you're not alone."
Mean, median and "binary walk" methods of averaging were compared, and all tended to come close enough to 42 for horseshoes and hand grenades.
We're so funny.
Jesse - Jul 17, 2007 5:27:13 am PDT #9903 of 10001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
That was a hilarious happening -- I'm pretty sure everyone got to submit their own idea of how many voters was "enough," and then we averaged.
JenP - Jul 17, 2007 5:28:00 am PDT #9904 of 10001
Thank, Sophia.
(OK, what the hell is the "binary walk" method?)
how does one navigate to the lawspeak document?
Also, this. Because I'm feeling like I should perhaps go read it before I ask more questions...
Nilly - Jul 17, 2007 5:29:59 am PDT #9905 of 10001
Swouncing
however, I can't get off my ass to do it....
How appropriate, considering that Nutty called the "Law Speak" page "cheesebutt".
are their more buffistas voting now
Less. At least in the ballots that I counted the votes for.
The number is always considerably higher than the 42 minimum required, though.
Seriously, I think that is very unlikely to occur.
I can stop posting altogether, since Jon, once again, said what I wanted to say.
How did the number 42 get chosen (other than the obvious...)
By vote. It was one of the first votes. It wasn't even an option in the vote, it was the result of some mathiness (combining the numbers people offered in their ballots, IIRC). Imagine our reaction when the numbers were calculated and the result ended up being 42!
I have a dumb question-- how does one navigate to the lawspeak document? I can never find it easily?
Um, I have no idea. I have it bookmarked somewhere, just for these cases. I think it's not prominent anywhere yet because it's still not finished.
Sophia Brooks - Jul 17, 2007 5:32:26 am PDT #9906 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
The thing is, and perhaps I am overstepping, but I don't think it is ever going to get finished, unless everyone else on the committee is working away. We (Nutty, Lee, Jesse, msbelle, and I) have been working on it for YEARS and partially because we cannot agree on the simplicity level and partially because we are too busy we have never really moved any further from it. Please correct me if I am wrong
JenP - Jul 17, 2007 5:34:24 am PDT #9907 of 10001
Imagine our reaction when the numbers were calculated and the result ended up being 42!
Destiny!