The proposals were constructed such that each player was on exactly two slates. So, ATM would have won if only A or C won; if both A and C won; or if C and B won, but not A. Other permutations would obtain for other players. The hope was that it would lead to some fun strategic voting behavior.
At least that was my intent... whether it succeeded, we shall see I suppose. On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 6:12 PM ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk < ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote: > On Tue, 2018-10-09 at 16:08 -0600, Reuben Staley wrote: > > Since you are Slate A and Slate C, you either can't win the game by > > announcement because Slate B players can as the former, or you can't win > > the game by announcement because there is no mechanism for the latter to > > do so. > > Doesn't the existence of a (Slate A and Slate C) player mess up some of > the conditionals as to whether specific slates can win? > > -- > ais523 > >
