That I do not know. I think whoever it was just thought it would be odd even to have 23 be the number.
I am not speaking for myself, though, so I don't really know.
First of all, 'Posse?' Passé
Cordelia ,'Potential'
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
Sophia Brooks - Mar 13, 2003 12:30:54 pm PST #7445 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
Jesse - Mar 13, 2003 12:32:28 pm PST #7446 of 10001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
I like rounding to the nearest unit. It'll be fun to have the number be 23. Or whatever.
Sophia Brooks - Mar 13, 2003 12:45:30 pm PST #7447 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
John H "Bureaucracy 1: Like Kafka, Only Funnier" Mar 11, 2003 10:02:27 pm EST
This was the original post. I think discussion is on either side.
bicyclops - Mar 13, 2003 1:17:38 pm PST #7448 of 10001
Back at #7289, John H said:
Hate me for asking, but what's a Binary Walk?
Did we ever get a (serious) answer for this? If so, I missed it. A link that explains it or a email to profile addy would be fine so as not to over-mathify the list. I'm just curious. Googling turned up lots of explanations of walks through a binary tree, but I'm not sure if that is related.
On rounding, I'm with the nearest integer crowd.
Cindy - Mar 13, 2003 1:21:10 pm PST #7449 of 10001
Nobody
The only reason I saw for rounding was, "so we don't get a weirdo MVT like 27."
Burrell "Bureaucracy 1: Like Kafka, Only Funnier" Mar 11, 2003 9:55:06 pm EST
I like rounding to the nearest unit. It'll be fun to have the number be 23. Or whatever.
I'm Jesse on a lot of this stuff like the above, except her unholy lust for the number 50, WHICH shalt doom her to an eternity in AN LAKE OF FIRE.
John H - Mar 13, 2003 1:39:21 pm PST #7450 of 10001
Hey everyone.
Numbers, number, numbers.
I didn't propose rounding. I'd be happy to have 17 or 23 or 39 Buffistas. I put that in because someone, Laura or Jesse maybe, suggested it and there were no disagreements at the time.
I once said 100 for MVT (minimum voter turnout) but I really was pulling a number out of my ass that I knew I could do math on.
I had no reason at all for saying 100 other than that I know what 51% of a hundred is.
Quite a few people agreed, soon after, that it was a little high.
Hec shortly after came up with the number 65 because it was around half of the people who voted, 135. Now I look at it, I guess it's half of 135 rounded up to the nearest five...
Jesse - Mar 13, 2003 1:39:57 pm PST #7451 of 10001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
I'm Jesse on a lot of this stuff like the above, except her unholy lust for the number 50, WHICH shalt doom her to an eternity in AN LAKE OF FIRE.
Just because SO MANY of you are MISTAKEN about the One True Number, I've resigned myself to living with a False Number. UNTIL THE DAY WHEN YOU SHALL ALL SEE THE ERROR OF YOUR WAYS.
Cindy - Mar 13, 2003 1:47:43 pm PST #7452 of 10001
Nobody
Hec shortly after came up with the number 65 because it was around half of the people who voted, 135. Now I look at it, I guess it's half of 135 rounded up to the nearest five...
*cough*arewetakingthezerosoutcompletely*cough*
eta:
The number 50 is the WHORE of BABYLON and Jesse is its PIMP.
P.M. Marc - Mar 13, 2003 1:51:50 pm PST #7453 of 10001
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear
17 is the ONE TRUE NUMBER. NILLY SHALL SHOW YOU THE WAY!!!
Sorry.
Right. No rounding. Just up to the nearest or down.
brenda m - Mar 13, 2003 1:52:34 pm PST #7454 of 10001
If you're going through hell/keep on going/don't slow down/keep your fear from showing/you might be gone/'fore the devil even knows you're there
But, Wolfram, if you change B to between 0 and 10, then, if you've voted NO for a) and vote 0 for b) then you've basically removed yourself from the decision if A passes despite your no vote, don't you?
My understanding is that we are going to average the results, so if it's only one question then seconding will automatically pass. Even if we were going to just use the number that comes up with the highest vote, it skews in favor of seconding. I'd rather see the question asked outright.
Can we add another question for the tabling (U.S.) of issues? Something along the lines of:
Once a subject has been raised for discussion and formally voted on, the results of that vote will be considered final and no futher discussion of that issue will be permitted for
a) 6 months b) 1 year