Phone Menu Voice ,'Conviction (1)'
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
One of the Davids said Keep it Simple and we've gone way past that.
Yeah, I did. I like Laura's summation back a few posts.
Let's give the practical application approach a try. Let us do the preferential ballot on this go around and see if people are comfortable using it and understand how it tallies. Let us not get ahead of ourselves again.
Tight focus. Next step. Keep it simple. When we get the results we'll have a lot more to work with.
Just that we decide these two questions (that Sophia just restated) via preferential ballots.
But it seems that the only other option would be a run-off, so I don't see where there's a need for a secondary proposal other than "preferential or run-off to decide on min. number of voters, etc."
What's the problem with questions 3 and 4?
We run up a set of sequential numbers for each one and see how that comes out with preferential voting, no?
But it seems that the only other option would be a run-offOh thank god! Because I felt like people were saying there were other options and I just wasn't seeing them. I still think that to do a runoff we would have to separate the 2 questions in #4.
I don't understand the rest of your sentance, though. I am sorry.
We run up a set of sequential numbers for each one and see how that comes out with preferential voting, no?
The question is that people are thinking there is no consensus about whether or not to try pref voting just this once.
I still think that to do a runoff we would have to separate the 2 questions in #4.
If they are two questions, they should be separate, but that's my view, which is in the minority, pass me the whip.
Hey, hey now. We already have one whip. We don't need two. That's just muddying the structure of power here.
The question is that people are thinking there is no consensus about whether or not to try pref voting just this once.
Specifically, that it's a false consensus of the handful of peeps who still have enough brainspace to come into Kafka at this point.
Hey, hey now. We already have one whip. We don't need two. That's just muddying the structure of power here.
Damn. Foiled again.
So how do we get past that. Because my brain is rapidly failing and I am about to leave my house and go to a liquor store.