On Tue, 8 Apr 2008, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:07 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> What's the point, really? -Goethe. > > I'd think the point is that American-style voting where the plurality > rules isn't that great. > > Not that Agora frequently has hotly-contested elections with more than > 2 candidates where a minority defeats a divided majority that could > form a workable coalition if such a thing were possible.
That's what I mean. I agree it would be good in a country, but in Agora, what's the point? Besides, voting is all public and can be taken back during the voting period. This is more like a legislature than a popular vote: a coalition deal be made in real time for an allegiance shift (it's happened before, and more interesting if it happens with manic deals at the last minute than automatically with ranked voting). -Goethe
