I meant 50%+1 by "majority".
Willow: Were there dolphins? Tara: Yes. Many dolphins at the pound. Willow: Was there a camel? Tara: There was the front of a camel. A half-camel.
'Selfless'
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
amych - Mar 03, 2003 5:21:12 pm PST #6389 of 10001
Now let us crush something soft and watch it fountain blood. That is a girlish thing to want to do, yes?
Betsy HP - Mar 03, 2003 5:21:43 pm PST #6390 of 10001
If I only had a brain...
I'm afraid I saw "majority" and thought "plurality". Bad, bad reader. No dictionary.
§ ita § - Mar 03, 2003 5:23:52 pm PST #6391 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Betsy, isn't that the same as "the preponderant quantity or share"? Or are all my big words broken?
Betsy HP - Mar 03, 2003 5:24:40 pm PST #6392 of 10001
If I only had a brain...
Nope. The precise meaning of "majority" is "more than 50%". Plurality is "preponderant quantity or share."
§ ita § - Mar 03, 2003 5:25:53 pm PST #6393 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Actually, that quote was from Merriam Webster.
edit: as 3c) for majority
Jessica - Mar 03, 2003 5:26:00 pm PST #6394 of 10001
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
Am I also the one thinking that people saying "oh dear, a very long detailed discussion about voting, I don't like it, we should just try and achieve consensus..." are saying something kind of illogical?
No, for two reasons. First, the objection isn't to long detailed discussions in general, it's to long detailed, mathy discussions about voting. (And I say that as someone who rather enjoys math.)
Second, this is a long, detailed, Buffistish conversation whose goal is to be the last of its kind, which makes me kind of unhappy.
Wow, maybe I've just convinced myself I'm against voting altogether. Because voting would cut this process way short... and I love everyone's commitment to this place and the energy they put into it.
Great! Now we just need 64 more people, and a revote...
John H - Mar 03, 2003 5:26:05 pm PST #6395 of 10001
In an attempt to be the Most Annoying Buffista Ever, I have to say that I don't know the word "plurality" in this context -- it means "the biggest number"?
Betsy HP - Mar 03, 2003 5:27:20 pm PST #6396 of 10001
If I only had a brain...
If the vote goes 35-33-32, 35 is the plurality. So yup.
Jon B. - Mar 03, 2003 5:27:49 pm PST #6397 of 10001
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
I don't know the word "plurality" in this context -- it means "the biggest number"?
Yes. The choice that receives more votes than any other single choice.
§ ita § - Mar 03, 2003 5:28:29 pm PST #6398 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
this is a long, detailed, Buffistish conversation whose goal is to be the last of its kind
Okay -- I voted for at least 4 days of discussion. We've had one. How are we killing one day discussions?