Why don't the two main proponants of the two different systems we're talking about write up a little blurb about the strengths of their system, and we put them to a vote?
I hope you don't think that I just come over for the spells and everything. I mean, I really like just talking and hanging out with you and stuff.
Willow ,'First Date'
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
Gandalfe - Mar 03, 2003 3:51:31 pm PST #6333 of 10001
The generation that could change the world is still looking for its car keys.
Jessica - Mar 03, 2003 3:53:53 pm PST #6334 of 10001
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
Many of them, I'm sure, don't really know how it works from there
Speaking just for myself, I am strongly against using any system here where the math can't be easily explained. I'm gonna want to know how the votes are counted.
bon bon - Mar 03, 2003 3:54:37 pm PST #6335 of 10001
It's five thousand for kissing, ten thousand for snuggling... End of list.
Why don't the two main proponants of the two different systems we're talking about write up a little blurb about the strengths of their system, and we put them to a vote?
This discussion is about hashing the pros and cons so we can possibly come to a consensus. Voting now would be premature.
Katie M - Mar 03, 2003 3:56:36 pm PST #6336 of 10001
I was charmed (albeit somewhat perplexed) by the fannish sensibility of many of the music choices -- it's like the director was trying to vid Canada. --loligo on the Olympic Opening Ceremonies
Okay, wait a minute - aren't we already using a most-votes-takes-all system with Mr. Poll when we choose thread names? Has that bothered people? (The answer may well be yes - I'm just asking.)
§ ita § - Mar 03, 2003 3:57:11 pm PST #6337 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
It's not just about how I vote. It's about what my vote means.
I was a math major. I can understand this stuff. But I think it's an unreasonably high barrier to entry, and had I known I was opening the door to this with my pro-vote pro-"simple majority" vote, I'd have voted differently.
The balance for quick and simple can't be tilted too far away from simple, or it's like work.
billytea - Mar 03, 2003 3:58:35 pm PST #6338 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.
Speaking just for myself, I am strongly against using any system here where the math can't be easily explained. I'm gonna want to know how the votes are counted.
It can be easily explained. This is not a 'can't get it' barrier, it's a 'can't be bothered' barrier. (In Australia. I just realised this could be taken as referring to here, which is not the case.)
Procedure:
1. Each voter ranks all the candidates in order of preference.
2. The system works out the two most popular candidates, and then finds which one of them most voters prefer. That candidate wins.
Explanation:
The election is like a whole series of runoffs. Each round, people vote for who they like best and the candidate with the lowest number of votes gets eliminated.
In the next round, everyone who voted for him/her/it votes for which of the remaining candidates they like best. The candidate with the lowest number of votes gets eliminated. And so on until:
Eventually you're left with only two candidates. Everyone votes for one or the other, and whoever gets over 50% of the vote wins.
But because all the voters provided a full ranking at the start, these runoffs can happen automatically. You only have to vote once.
DavidS - Mar 03, 2003 4:01:41 pm PST #6339 of 10001
"Look, son, if it's good enough for Shirley Bassey, it's good enough for you."
The balance for quick and simple can't be tilted too far away from simple, or it's like work.
go simple. choose simple.
Do people get what I'm saying about using up the good will of the board and spending capital voting? I think ita expresses it succintly.
Jessica - Mar 03, 2003 4:06:34 pm PST #6340 of 10001
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
Okay...I now understand the system, and I'm still against it.
Honestly, I thought we were only going to use this voting system thing for pro/anti type issues, not things where we'd need to rank multiple optons. I thought that we explicitly excluded thread-naming for that very reason.
John H - Mar 03, 2003 4:06:35 pm PST #6341 of 10001
OK now I'm at work, but I'm not going to get any done, am I?
Whose suggestion was this:
On the ballot the question reads: Do you think 10 Buffistas should constitute the minimum number for each vote to count? yes/no
On the ballot the question reads: Do you think 30 Buffistas should constitute the minimum number for each vote to count? yes/no
I don't get how that would work, if I were allowed to vote for both. Now that's a confusing system...
When John said the thing about there being NO POINTS, that's when it was all clear to me.
I wonder if we're coming up against some wholly other system of voting -- the "vote for three candidates out of ten for school board" system, which seems to assign three points around somehow -- and that's muddying the waters.
I am strongly against using any system here where the math can't be easily explained. I'm gonna want to know how the votes are counted.
Jessica, are you saying you didn't understand the Whedon/Monkey/Cheese Man "mathy if it needs to be" examples above? [edit: ignore this now Jessica's posted again]
billytea, you know I love you but your explanation may have confused people more, plus disagrees with what I thought Jon and I hashed out earlier in this thread.
Jessica - Mar 03, 2003 4:09:00 pm PST #6342 of 10001
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
Jessica, are you saying you didn't understand the Whedon/Monkey/Cheese Man "mathy if it needs to be" examples above?
Yes, but billytea's explanation cleared things up.
BUT, only for me, because I'm reading the thread right now. It gives me hives to think of someone (or, more likely three or four people, with another ten chiming in with a link to this discussion, and another twenty posting "RTFF") having to post a similar explanation every time we have a vote. Which is what will happen.