On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 10:01 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 5/23/2021 2:21 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote: > > On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 4:12 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-business > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> After the nomination period ends, the ADoP (or, if the office is > >> the ADoP, the Assessor) CAN and, in a timely fashion, SHALL: > >> > >> 1) If the election is contested, initiate an Agoran decision to > >> select the winner of the election (the poll). For this > >> decision, the Vote Collector is the ADoP (or, if the office > >> is the ADoP, the Assessor), the valid options are > >> the candidates for that election (including those who become > >> candidates after its initiation), and the voting method is > >> instant runoff. When the poll is resolved, its outcome, if a > >> player, wins the election. If the outcome is not a player, the > >> election ends with no winner. > >> > > > > The second sentence in (1) has an uncomfortably large complexity, > > arising in large part from the two parentheticals. Not sure if there's > > something that can be done to make that a bit more legible. > > Yah, I had a little struggle with that sentence. The only thing I > actually added was the Assessor parenthetical - I think the list of > decision properties is pretty much required boilerplate. > > I thought about breaking out a definition "the Election Monitor is the > ADoP, or the Assessor if the office is ADoP" and then saying "the Election > Monitor is the vote collector" but making a one-off definition separated > from its single contextual use seemed worse?
Well, it's used twice. Once in the sentence that introduces the list, and once in (1). Granted, defining a term for two uses feels a bit weird, but I think the reduction in sentence complexity is worthwhile. Nitpick: Election Monitor sounds a bit unfriendly. Election Commissioner? That's not perfect either.. -Aris
