and so the Ple minions have been pointed out as bad things
You'll fight, and you'll shag, and you'll hate each other till it makes you quiver, but you'll never be friends.
Spike ,'Sleeper'
Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!
We open it up, we talks the talk, we votes, we shuts it down. This thread is to free up Bureaucracy for daily details as we hammer out the Big Issues towards a vote. Open only when a proposal has been made and seconded according to Buffista policy (Which we voted on!). If this thread is closed, hie thee to Bureaucracy instead!
Deena - Mar 22, 2003 11:20:13 am PST #223 of 10289
How are you me? You need to stop that. Only I can be me. ~Kara
Typo Boy - Mar 22, 2003 11:22:11 am PST #224 of 10289
Calli: My people have a saying. A man who trusts can never be betrayed, only mistaken.Avon: Life expectancy among your people must be extremely short.
It seems like we don't have consensus on the alternatives. I honestly don't think people who favor six months should be pushing for three months as the alternative if six months does not pass. If you absolutely think that you like six months better than any other alternative, but also strongly feel that three months should be the alternative if six months doesn't pass (rather than four) then you are really saying that you are not happy with two alternatives and want three.
I think the majority of people who don't want six months prefer four to three. If we are only having two alternatives and not using pmmmph then the second alternative should be the one that those who don't want six months favor. Otherwise you are making on heck of a strong argument for pmmph.
In other words you are not gong get a consenus on a ballot of:
1) 6 months
2) Wrong
If you want a consensus on two choices, then the people who favor choice A) shoulld not be part of the decision on what choice B) is unless they are willing to have a choice (C.
Kat - Mar 22, 2003 11:25:33 am PST #225 of 10289
"I keep to a strict diet of ill-advised enthusiasm and heartfelt regret." Leigh Bardugo
If you want a consensus on two choices, then the people who favor choice A) shoulld not be part of the decision on what choice B) is unless they are willing to have a choice (C.
Huh. Interesting.
So since I have embraced 6 as the one true choice, I'm not allowed to have an opinion on what else I prefer should 6 not win?
Burrell - Mar 22, 2003 11:31:44 am PST #226 of 10289
Why did Darth Vader cross the road? To get to the Dark Side!
Uh, Typo, I think you have a bee in your bonnet. You clearly want 4 months, but I don't think it follows that all the people who are claiming they prefer 3 are actually planning on voting for 6.
I honestly don't think people who favor six months should be pushing for three months as the alternative if six months does not pass.
I think anyone who cares about it should get to have a say, even if they plan on voting for the other option. What if someone wants *either* 6 or 3? He/she should get a legitimate airing.
There are, admittedly, a few folks like me who see piss little difference between 3 & 4 and who therefore are keeping out of the debate regarding the second number. But I don't think that someone else has the right to dictate that I--or anyone who cares more--CANNOT have a say.
If you absolutely think that you like six months better than any other alternative, but also strongly feel that three months should be the alternative if six months doesn't pass (rather than four) then you are really saying that you are not happy with two alternatives and want three.
Huh?
Gandalfe - Mar 22, 2003 11:36:44 am PST #227 of 10289
The generation that could change the world is still looking for its car keys.
I think we need to have 3 or 4 alternatives. It's becoming clear. Which leads into the whole preferential voting/runoff thing. What joy.
Jessica - Mar 22, 2003 11:38:35 am PST #228 of 10289
If I want to become a cloud of bats, does each bat need a separate vaccination?
If you absolutely think that you like six months better than any other alternative, but also strongly feel that three months should be the alternative if six months doesn't pass (rather than four) then you are really saying that you are not happy with two alternatives and want three.
Color me baffled. This makes no sense at all.
You're saying that people with a clear first choice should not be allowed to have a second choice unless they also have a third choice?
Why?
Deena - Mar 22, 2003 11:40:34 am PST #229 of 10289
How are you me? You need to stop that. Only I can be me. ~Kara
No, no.
We have 6 definitely. We have 3 and 4 as maybes, and we have the option of writing in a number between 1 and 12 and averaging to the nearest whole number. We just need people who care about 3, 4 or write in to chime in for a consensus.
Burrell - Mar 22, 2003 11:42:20 am PST #230 of 10289
Why did Darth Vader cross the road? To get to the Dark Side!
But I think that, if someone cares about 3 vs 4, regardless of how he plans to actually vote, he should have a say.
Kat - Mar 22, 2003 11:43:53 am PST #231 of 10289
"I keep to a strict diet of ill-advised enthusiasm and heartfelt regret." Leigh Bardugo
I'd suggest having 3, 4, 6 as the options. If we have to have a runoff, okay. No big. But there's a groundswell in my head for 6 (and I see lots of enthusiastic 6-pushers here) so maybe we would get majority + 1 the first time around even with three options.
Why not try it and see?
Jessica - Mar 22, 2003 11:55:57 am PST #232 of 10289
If I want to become a cloud of bats, does each bat need a separate vaccination?
If we can't come to a consensus for 3 vs 4, I'd rather have a ballot with "Put a number between 2 and 8* in this box" (average the results, round to the nearest integer) than three choices, just to get to the final answer quicker.
(*2 and 8 months seeming like the absolute lowest and highest reasonable time limits to me, but obviously that's up for debate.)