The problem, Deb, is that it doesn't take into account people who will attend either, but have a clear preference. I'm trying to come up with a ballot that accounts for both willingness/ability to attend and enthusiasm for the location, which, I think, is similar to what you're saying, Brenda.
Every planet has its own weird customs. About a year before we met, I spent six weeks on a moon where the principal form of recreation was juggling geese. My hand to God. Baby geese. Goslings. They were juggled.
Wash ,'Our Mrs. Reynolds'
F2F 3: Who's Bringing the Guacamole?
Plan what to do, what to wear (you can never go wrong with a corset), and get ready for the next BuffistaCon: San Francisco, May 19-21, 2006! Everything else, go here! Swag!
DebetEsse - Aug 25, 2005 10:37:29 am PDT #4590 of 10001
Woe to the fucking wicked.
NoiseDesign - Aug 25, 2005 10:39:54 am PDT #4591 of 10001
Our wings are not tired
We could have voting via short essay.
t /smartass
Oh who the hell am I kidding, that never closes.
DebetEsse - Aug 25, 2005 10:43:01 am PDT #4592 of 10001
Woe to the fucking wicked.
I don't think Mr. Poll offers that option.
Nicole - Aug 25, 2005 10:46:40 am PDT #4593 of 10001
I'm getting the pig!
There were four cities in the final vote, but there was a fair amount of narrowing of cities before that.
Ok. I'm just sayin' that if we had four cities this time, I'd be all for extreme voting - Check here / initial here / promise you'll come / cancellations require a note from a doctor, etc. EXTREME voting!
But with two cities, we aren't branching out in so many directions. We have two choices. I (personally) think we could even just vote YES or NO on this one. (Voting NO doesn't mean someone can't attend if the other city wins. It's just stating a preference.)
Edit - But I'm also fine with the four ways of saying YES or NO option. Just so we're clear.
Fred Pete - Aug 25, 2005 10:52:26 am PDT #4594 of 10001
Ann, that's a ferret.
There were four cities in the final vote, but there was a fair amount of narrowing of cities before that.
There were two rounds of voting. The first narrowed the choices from 6 to 4, and the second round produced one winner.
DebetEsse - Aug 25, 2005 10:55:33 am PDT #4595 of 10001
Woe to the fucking wicked.
I really strongly oppose a straight "which one" vote. More people may prefer one, but be able to attend the other, while people who prefer the other can't attend the winner.
Nicole - Aug 25, 2005 10:59:49 am PDT #4596 of 10001
I'm getting the pig!
I'm extremely confused as to why people would vote for a city just because they preferred it but couldn't attend the F2F there.
§ ita § - Aug 25, 2005 11:02:35 am PDT #4597 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
I think the goal is to capture the difference between "Prefer to go to SF, can make Seattle" and "Can't afford Seattle, can we do SF?"
Emily - Aug 25, 2005 11:03:00 am PDT #4598 of 10001
"In the equation E = mc⬧, c⬧ is a pretty big honking number." - Scola
I don't think she meant "Vote for one but only be able to attend the other," just "vote for one but also be able to attend the other." I think.
NoiseDesign - Aug 25, 2005 11:03:05 am PDT #4599 of 10001
Our wings are not tired
Buffistas do many things which confuse me.