I like having the preset limits, otherwise someone's got to decide where to draw the line on what's extreme. It makes more sense than saying "if we decide whatever you think is extreme, we'll reject it after the fact."
To commemorate a past event, you kill and eat an animal. It's a ritual sacrifice, with pie.
Anya ,'Sleeper'
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
bicyclops - Mar 14, 2003 3:53:53 pm PST #7578 of 10001
DavidS - Mar 14, 2003 3:58:55 pm PST #7579 of 10001
"Look, son, if it's good enough for Shirley Bassey, it's good enough for you."
What do you think of wording it that way though: "buffistas have suggested numbers between x and y, but please put in whatever you think"?
I think the point/counterpoint posts of Sophia and Liese would do a better job of explaining what the implications were for each choice. What a high number for MVT would do, what a low number for Seconds could do.
The effect is kind of the same - trying to give quick information that encapsulates longer discussion, but putting it on the ballot that way is sort of prescriptive, whereas reading the positions would allow more room for considering it.
amych - Mar 14, 2003 4:01:44 pm PST #7580 of 10001
Now let us crush something soft and watch it fountain blood. That is a girlish thing to want to do, yes?
I haven't heard anyone proposing anything higher than 65.
Actually, I more than halfway meant it when I posted 97. The post was a late-night, not worded so as to be taken seriously, but I favor a very high MVT.
And I don't like the idea of "pick a number between 2 and 100, suggestions range from 10 to 65" -- it really seems designed to skew votes toward the midrange.
Edit: I should specify that I mean we should either pick 2-100 or 10-65, not that I want no upper and lower limits at all.
Sean K - Mar 14, 2003 4:03:22 pm PST #7581 of 10001
You can't leave me to my own devices; my devices are Nap and Eat. -Zenkitty
I'd also like to point out that asking for Buffistas to pick a number for MVT seems very likely in getting a different number in the box for every vote turned in.
What would we do then?
amych - Mar 14, 2003 4:05:42 pm PST #7582 of 10001
Now let us crush something soft and watch it fountain blood. That is a girlish thing to want to do, yes?
What would we do then?
Some form of average -- both mean and median have been discussed.
John H - Mar 14, 2003 4:08:34 pm PST #7583 of 10001
I mean we should either pick 2-100 or 10-65, not that I want no upper and lower limits at all.
That's what I was proposing.
I meant "take out the 2-100, put in the other buffista-suggestion numbers".
Some form of average
I recall Jon B posting that he'd be shocked if we did anything other than the mean.
Sophia Brooks - Mar 14, 2003 4:10:09 pm PST #7584 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
What Ple proposed it using the "median" to check ourselves on the "mean". That is, if they are very different, I think there is a high or low number really skewing.
P.M. Marc - Mar 14, 2003 4:12:12 pm PST #7585 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
What Ple proposed it using the "median" to check ourselves on the "mean". That is, if they are very different, I think there is a high or low number really skewing.
Yerp.
Sean K - Mar 14, 2003 4:13:07 pm PST #7586 of 10001
You can't leave me to my own devices; my devices are Nap and Eat. -Zenkitty
Okay, just making sure I was following. I'll return to my lurking now.
John H - Mar 14, 2003 4:15:40 pm PST #7587 of 10001
using the "median" to check ourselves on the "mean"
Seems sensible. And where's that dissertation on the Binary Walk or Octal Amble or Hex Hike or whatever, Gar? Enquiring minds want to know.