OK-- I am still really hesitant to post the voting announcement to press with so much disagreement about the voting method.

Here is the Press text:

Hear Ye! Hear Ye!

It is time for one of the last procedural votes.

When we first startd this discussion, we really wanted to be able to have a way to not talk about the same issue over and over and over... Here we have one.

MORATORIUM ON REOPENING DISCUSSIONS

After a proposal, discussion and vote, further discussion on a given matter should be closed for:

3 months
4 months
6 months
No Preference

Note that the result of this vote will apply to ALL decisions, affirmative and negative.

Ballot Here

Voting starts Monday night (March 24, 2003) at midnight and closes Thursday night (Mar. 27, 2003) at midnight (that would be "Board Time", i.e. EST)

Discussion starts here: Jesse "Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!" Mar 20, 2003 8:36:53 pm EST

Please note that the vast majority of this discussion has to do with how to conduct the vote.

Although the discussion is officially closed, you may ask any questions in Bureaucracy

Remember

1. A choice needs a majority to win
2. Votes of no pref. count toward the minimum voter turnout of 42
3. Discussion is closed once the vote starts.

There is no mention of preferential/runoff voting. I still think maybe we should ait a day and try to make people feel more like a part of the process.

Thanks David.

I just reread everyone's posts over the last two days (again). I saw two people against "just this once" -- Kat & PM -- three or four if you include ita and Burrell, but I wasn't clear on their positions. I counted 15 people for "just this once." The rest just want the talking to stop. Fifteen for vs. at most four against. That looks like an old fashioned Buffista consensus to me.

For the record, the 15 are me, Wolfram, billytea, brenda m, sophia brooks, hil r., rebecca lizard, typo boy, david s, Lyra Jane, Jesse, Deena, kat perez, askye, and cindy

Well, except Jesse and I both changed to "we just want the talking to stop...." ; )

Laura also said no. Me, I really am ok with it, but I'm not sure my opinion is strong enough to be for it.

Hi Sophia. I'm still getting the following text in the bit about the second choice:

Please provide a second choice, should your first choice receive the least number of votes. This second choice will only be used if no first choice receives more than 50% of the votes. It will be used to resort the ballots of those whose first choice received the least number of votes. If you voted for one of the top two vote getters, your second choice will be ignored. It's like having an instant runoff.

As Jon has noted, I'm in favour of trying it out this time round; but I think you're wanting to avoid reference to PV or runoffs?

OK-- there are 6 minutes left until I am supposed to post this puppy.

Can someone else weigh in on whether or not to do so? I am really torn.

billy-- I think the announcement in Press doesn't have to include the text of the ballow. Those are ballot instructions. (Jon is doing ballot, I am doing the announcement).

Do you think the whole thing should go in the Press, and more importantly, do you think we should wait?

Fuck it. I'm going to bed. I'm really pissed that two people came on here at the last minute with ass-cap objections and won't even say why. I don't have time to redo the ballot. If you don't want to do preferential voting, don't pick a second choice. It'll submit either way. Good night.

Sophia, I wouldn't post it until a majority of, at least recent, posters come and tell you to do so. If it doesn't go up, the world doesn't stop turning. I'm not telling you to because I just caught up and I don't like the rancorous feeling I'm getting.

I don't mind trying PV, but I also don't want to alienate people who hate it for whatever reason. It's not worth that.

I'm with you Deena on that last part. It's just... didn't we say that we would have a discussion for so many days and then voting would start?