But if the same number of people can go to either, preference would then have a role in the decision.
And don't you ever stand for that sort of thing. Someone ever tries to kill you, you try to kill 'em right back! ... You got the right same as anyone to live and try to kill people.
Mal ,'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 11:15:43 am PDT #4602 of 10001
Woe to the fucking wicked.
deborah grabien - Aug 25, 2005 11:28:47 am PDT #4603 of 10001
It really doesn't matter. It's just an opinion. Don't worry about it. Not worth the hassle.
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.
Oh, OK - got it. Makes sense, even if it makes it trickier.
Carry on.
DebetEsse - Aug 25, 2005 11:35:52 am PDT #4604 of 10001
Woe to the fucking wicked.
Ok, so, how about, for each city:
- Can/will attend and like this option a lot
- Can/will attend and am neutral on preference
- Can/will attend but don't particularly like this option
- Can't/won't attend in this city
With the last one being our first line of decision.
§ ita § - Aug 25, 2005 11:38:45 am PDT #4605 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
My sense of symmetry is bothered by there being one positive choice and three neutral to negative ones -- but you'll be the one doing the arithmetic in the end. Is the scale of one to four too dry and abstract?
DebetEsse - Aug 25, 2005 11:39:42 am PDT #4606 of 10001
Woe to the fucking wicked.
Too abstract, I think
brenda m - Aug 25, 2005 11:41:35 am PDT #4607 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
Heh. Well, to balance it out we could have
Can't/won't attend and it's breaking my heart
Can't/won't attend and I could care less
Can't/won't attend and I'll be dancing at my escape from you bastiges
but I'm not sure what we'd accomplish. Happy families, yadda yadda.
§ ita § - Aug 25, 2005 11:42:24 am PDT #4608 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Just as long as people don't get lost in a morass of semantics, I guess.
Sean K - Aug 25, 2005 11:43:29 am PDT #4609 of 10001
You can't leave me to my own devices; my devices are Nap and Eat. -Zenkitty
With the last one being our first line of decision.
Whichever city gets the most "Can't/won't attend in this city" answers, if any, loses?
Should it be two parts then? One question asks "Which One City," while the second part asks "How Do You Feel About It?"
Sean K - Aug 25, 2005 11:44:46 am PDT #4610 of 10001
You can't leave me to my own devices; my devices are Nap and Eat. -Zenkitty
ita says what I'm trying to say, but she uses fewer words.
There should be part of the poll that's just a yes/no, Seattle/SF question.
DebetEsse - Aug 25, 2005 11:49:39 am PDT #4611 of 10001
Woe to the fucking wicked.
Being in the head of the person who generated the language, I don't understand what's confusing about the options. I'm more than happy to change it, but I don't know how to make it clearer without reducing the usefulness significantly.
There should be part of the poll that's just a yes/no, Seattle/SF question.
With the current language, why?