1) emphatically yes; 2) yes; 3) eh; 4) no; 5) no fuckin' way; 6) abstain; 7) don't give a rat's ass; 8) monkey; 9) what the hell's a quorum? 10) LOL
t laughing like a drain
Vote early; vote often. Vote monkey.
Wesley: We were fighting on opposite sides, but it was the same war. Fred: but you hated her…didn't you? Wesley: It's not always about holding hands.
'Shells'
Bureaucracy 1: Like Kafka, Only Funnier
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
billytea - Feb 27, 2003 4:59:01 pm PST #5915 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.
§ ita § - Feb 27, 2003 5:00:41 pm PST #5916 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Monkey stuffers.
Tangentially, but on the topic of poor ballot design, I discovered that my company gave out a culture satisfaction test (easy on the yoghurt jokes, folks) where you could rate statements about the company from 1 to 5. 5 was "strongly agree" and 1 was "slightly agree".
There's representation for you.
Kristen - Feb 27, 2003 5:02:57 pm PST #5917 of 10001
if I were coming in to vote now, I'd be more tempted to vote against further voting than I would have been yesterday.
You read my mind. Plus it would kind of make me want to go back and change my vote.
Laura - Feb 27, 2003 5:10:28 pm PST #5918 of 10001
Our wings are not tired.
So you managed to put another 150 posts here while I did away from computer stuff! Do I need to threadsuck the whole thing, or can someone summarize what we are deciding.
As the Palm Beach County Florida Buffista I declare myself resident expert on poor ballot design.
Sophia Brooks - Feb 27, 2003 5:11:43 pm PST #5919 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
Laura-- don't read it.
A long discussion about different methods of voting (borda, Australian, Condorcet) which made people want not to vote anymore.
bon bon - Feb 27, 2003 5:12:23 pm PST #5920 of 10001
It's five thousand for kissing, ten thousand for snuggling... End of list.
Tangentially, but on the topic of poor ballot design, I discovered that my company gave out a culture satisfaction test (easy on the yoghurt jokes, folks) where you could rate statements about the company from 1 to 5. 5 was "strongly agree" and 1 was "slightly agree".
There's representation for you.
Don't get me started on the university's class rating system. Every single question is a superlative like "I had a strong desire to take this course" and "I learned a substantial amount of material" and "class discussion was by far the best part of this course, in fact, it was the best part of my day" and "I think this professor loves me and would like to have a million of my babies and name them all after me" and you can strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree or be neutral.
Cindy - Feb 27, 2003 5:15:16 pm PST #5921 of 10001
Nobody
post deleted til I can figure out the html
P.M. Marc - Feb 27, 2003 5:17:19 pm PST #5922 of 10001
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear
Wroddy McFuck.
I think that may be the best Wrod ever.
Like Roddy McD, no?
Cindy - Feb 27, 2003 5:19:19 pm PST #5923 of 10001
Nobody
Yes, exactly like Roddy McD.
Hey, I closed my <font="-2"> tag with a /font> (I left off the less-than carat on the close tag). Every time I went back in and added the less-than tag and then submitted it, it still showed up as a dropped tag and the lt tag I put in disappeared.
I blame the maths.
Cindy - Feb 27, 2003 5:20:54 pm PST #5924 of 10001
Nobody
Gar - I'm sorry. I knew you weren't literally saying or implying I conned anyone, and that was completely separate (hence the paragraph break) from the "making me sick part". I'm sorry if I made it seem like that post upset me. What's upsetting me is that what is that a poll poll is being made to look complicated because people are arguing hypotheticals that haven't been and can't be brought to the table unless we know if we're going to continue to poll people.
We have to keep in mind that all this is just to manage administrivia. That's it.
Of course anyone will always be free to propose anything - that includes however ballots are ranked, laid-out, worded, and any minimums to be imposed in the future, etc. But this whole thing has jumped the gun.
But what we're also going to have to sort out is, what if 100 people don't vote?
John -
from John H "Bureaucracy 1: Like Kafka, Only Funnier" Feb 27, 2003 5:28:45 pm EST
The intial ballot included questions that, if voted down (item 2) and pass (item 3) (and deer loward, that's how I voted and I'm so very glad right now on that) will render this whole conversation unnecessary. If that's the case, all the convo will have accomplished is bringing about a lot of frustration, and the risk of scaring people off of choosing to use a polling method that takes place on a form, rather than gleeming the consensus-that-wasn't from a thread. That's all that many (maybe most) of us want - to not guess any longer at whether or not the TV Thread was really shot down, or if the anti-proliferation folks just spoke last.
The points you made in the above cited post will be relevant if number 2 passes and/or number 3 doesn't. But they're not now. By the way, welcome back, I've missed you.
For the record, this is what I had in mind when I mentioned having a moratorium on the convo after the polls were open.
Plus it would kind of make me want to go back and change my vote.
Wroddy McFuck.
(Small font deleted as it seemed to not want to play nice, but text of post remains the same.)