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 day, the buffistas decided that voting would be a good idea. Next we had to decide how voting should be done. This all went very smoothly, because ____
It was all a dream, and no-one bothered to wake up?
Seriously, I think actually that perhaps the how should have been discussed and options set in place before the what was voted on.
So the tale would start with "The B's decided to see if they wanted to vote. They came up with ideas on what ways of voting would work best with their system. Emails were sent to all registered members, with a survey attached. Stats were gathered. The top two choices were narrowed down, and emails were sent again."
And so on.
voting may not be the best of all possible worlds, but, once voting was decided, everything very quickly became very upsetting and annoying for you.
In this case, it was already upsetting and annoying. I just stopped being quiet about it.
I am fairly certain that I am not a member of the Go14 and I found the phrase, not offensive, but deliberately baiting and divisive.
We have a problem--we need to vote on two items that will inevitably require more than two options. We need a practical solution. It is either preferential voting or a run-off. One or the other. That's it. It's simple, really.
I am fairly certain that I am not a member of the Go14 and I found the phrase, not offensive, but deliberately baiting and divisive.
Well, I did cop to being pissy. I wasn't attempting to bait.
so what possible decisions would we have to make as a community where there are more than two options?
The number of votes required for MVT and the number for seconds, if any.
Or did we already decide on seconds? And could anyone tell me what "seconds" means?
so what possible decisions would we have to make as a community where there are more than two options
There's only ever been one actual example, and it's the very next vote we need to have. Minimum Voter Turnout.
After that everything gets a hell of a lot simpler.
Ah, hell. Why not just have people fill in the number they think would work best, and run the measures of central tendency?
Burrell:
Seconds would require that more than one Buffista thought something needed to be voted on.
Some people think that if any Buffista thinks an item should be voted on, we should open "formal discussion period and voting"
Other think (some unknown number) should agree before we vote.
The more I think about it, why aren't we just collecting the number data for minimum votes? It makes more sense to my pointy head than trying to randomly select numbers to choose from and then deciding how to choose between those...
Thanks Sophia, for the explanation. So seconds aren't yet a done deal? So then we might not need to vote on the number.
The more I think about it, why aren't we just collecting the number data for minimum votes? It makes more sense to my pointy head than trying to randomly select numbers to choose from and then deciding how to choose between those..
That makes sense to me. There was an objection to it earlier that I can't remember-- I think the fact that it wouldn't be a "majority". However a median or a mode seems fair.
