Buffy ,'Get It Done'
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!
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?
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.
But I think that, if someone cares about 3 vs 4, regardless of how he plans to actually vote, he should have a say.
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?
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.)
But there's a groundswell in my head for 6.
I hope it's not giving you a headache. (Sorry, I couldn't resist.)
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.)
I think this too. It's how we got to perfect number 42 on the minimum vote total. Average it. Then we can stop having the 3 or 4 discussion.
I don't like the idea of averaging. I want to vote either between 6 & 3 or 6 & 4. It's cleaner. Plus, I feel like it's silly of us not to be able to come to some agreement on 3 versus 4. Egad!
I don't like averaging either. I vote for 6 (or 3 or 4) because that's what I want it to be. Not 5.7. Or 5.
If we can't pick between 3 and 4, make a three choice ballot.
We voted for the right thing on majority/plurality. Having both 3 and 4 months on the ballot won't split the 3-month vote, because we'll probably have a runoff.