The voting totals were posted in Press last night.
This is not funny. This... this is a morality tale about the evils of sake.
Simon ,'Objects In Space'
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
DXMachina - Mar 03, 2003 7:12:46 am PST #6179 of 10001
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
Angus G - Mar 03, 2003 7:13:30 am PST #6180 of 10001
Roguish Laird
Nilly - Mar 03, 2003 7:17:35 am PST #6181 of 10001
Swouncing
The final vote: jengod "Sunnydale Press" Mar 3, 2003 12:00:27 am EST
jengod and Sophia and all of you - I hope somebody says it better in a few posts so that I can just 'wrod' them, but in the meantime, just my humble thanks for all your work, and my hopes that I'll be more available in the future to help. You very much rock.
[Edit: Everything could be mathier. But in a fun way.]
Sophia Brooks - Mar 03, 2003 7:31:25 am PST #6182 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
A quick stab at the next round of decisions (after which most of this stuff will be over)
1. Do we want a separate thread for actual voting discussions?
2. Do we want to close the talking about a subject when the voting starts?
3. How many Buffistas does it take to make a vote count? Do abstentions count toward this?
4. Do we have some way of deciding what we vote on? Do we need "seconds"? Obviously not everything needs to be voted on!
edited to reflect ita's and Jon's suggestion.
§ ita § - Mar 03, 2003 7:37:08 am PST #6183 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
2. Do we want to close the talking about a subject after the voting starts?
I recommend this language be changed to "Do we want to close the talking about a subject when the voting starts?"
Jesse - Mar 03, 2003 7:39:35 am PST #6184 of 10001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
Sophia's Four Points look good to me.
Thanks so much for receiving the votes and tabulating and everything, jengod!
I'm all excited because of how many people voted. I just think it's great. I'm also glad that there were so few weekend voters, because I did wonder about peoples' access. I guess weekend-access people are also evening-access people, generally.
Sophia Brooks - Mar 03, 2003 7:50:25 am PST #6185 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
I'll edit, ita.
Jon B. - Mar 03, 2003 8:25:36 am PST #6186 of 10001
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
Nice summary, Sophia. There was also the issue of whether abstentions count towards #3.
And to avoid a runoff ballot, I would like to suggest again that we use a preferential ballot to determine the number of Buffistas needed to make a vote count (a.k.a. "the quorum"). Yes, it's mathy. But it's also the system used by the government of Australia as well as Cambridge, MA. If it's good enough for them, it should be good enough for us. It will save us time. And if the vote counters are intimidated by it, I volunteer to add the votes and post detailed results.
Sophia Brooks - Mar 03, 2003 8:31:23 am PST #6187 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
Edited, Jon.
Am-Chau Yarkona - Mar 03, 2003 8:31:38 am PST #6188 of 10001
I bop to Wittgenstein. -- Nutty
Jon, could you point me to some good explanations of the differences in vote counting systems? I can deal with the basic yes/no and I know about proportional representation, but I'm not sure exactly what's different about a preferential ballot. (You may have explained this before. I have skimmed. If that's the case, I'm sorry to bother you but a post number would be really helpful.)