On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 09:56:31PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 11:53:51AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 09:23:02PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > > >> Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > Here's how people voted:
> > > Can any of
On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 09:56:31PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 11:53:51AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 09:23:02PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > > >> Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > Here's how people voted:
> > > Can any o
Hi.
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
on "Fri, 30 Mar 2001 16:26:02 -0800",
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 3. The software needs to be fixed.
> 5. Once they're done, the software can be fixed.
> 6. The vote software should be packaged when this is all over with - in
>fact people should e
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Collins) writes:
> IOW, if I only mark "--1--", then my vote is as good as nothing, since I
> made no preference of one over the other.
That's ludicrous. It is completely obvious that this voter meant to specify
preference for the marked candidate relative to all others.
Hi.
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
on "Fri, 30 Mar 2001 16:26:02 -0800",
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 3. The software needs to be fixed.
> 5. Once they're done, the software can be fixed.
> 6. The vote software should be packaged when this is all over with - in
>fact people should
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Collins) writes:
> IOW, if I only mark "--1--", then my vote is as good as nothing, since I
> made no preference of one over the other.
That's ludicrous. It is completely obvious that this voter meant to specify
preference for the marked candidate relative to all others.
On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 05:11:12PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > > Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't repeat. To vote
> > > "no, no matter what" do not leave an option black but rank "None Of
> > > The Above" higher than the unacceptable choices.
> >
> > So what e
On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 05:11:12PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > > Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't repeat. To vote
> > > "no, no matter what" do not leave an option black but rank "None Of
> > > The Above" higher than the unacceptable choices.
> >
> > So what
>> Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't repeat. To vote
> > "no, no matter what" do not leave an option black but rank "None Of
> > The Above" higher than the unacceptable choices.
>
> So what exactly is "open for interpretation
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> >> Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > IOW, if I only mark "--1--", then my vote is as good as nothing, since I
This vote is defined to declare that item 3 dominates all other items.
Items not marked are declared by the voter as
On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 10:19:46PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> Debatable. Unmarked votes can also be counted as "equally last", so
> that "--1--" count is the same as "22122". The constitution is unclear
> on this (as well as many other things), which is why AJ, Buddha Buck,
> Raul, and a coupl
>> Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't repeat. To vote
> > "no, no matter what" do not leave an option black but rank "None Of
> > The Above" higher than the unacceptable choices.
>
> So what exactly is "open for interpretatio
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> >> Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > IOW, if I only mark "--1--", then my vote is as good as nothing, since I
This vote is defined to declare that item 3 dominates all other items.
Items not marked are declared by the voter as
On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 10:19:46PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> Debatable. Unmarked votes can also be counted as "equally last", so
> that "--1--" count is the same as "22122". The constitution is unclear
> on this (as well as many other things), which is why AJ, Buddha Buck,
> Raul, and a coup
says, voting --1-- ammounts IMO to "I like C over ABDE
but I don't have a preference regarding the relation among the other
options". Along the same vein, "--1-2" means "I like C and 'nothing
else'". With our counting procedure this is *not* the same as &q
says, voting --1-- ammounts IMO to "I like C over ABDE
but I don't have a preference regarding the relation among the other
options". Along the same vein, "--1-2" means "I like C and 'nothing
else'". With our counting procedure this is *not* the sam
On 29-Mar-01, 20:56 (CST), Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The thing is, you only get a vote over someone else if they marked it.
>
> IOW, if I only mark "--1--", then my vote is as good as nothing, since I
> made no preference of one over the other. So not specifying a rank in
> the ord
> "Ben" == Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ben> The thing is, you only get a vote over someone else if they
Ben> marked it.
Right..
Ben> IOW, if I only mark "--1--", then my vote is as good as
Ben> nothing, since I made no preference of one over the other. So
Ben>
Ben Collins wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 11:53:51AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 09:23:02PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > > >> Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > Here's how people voted:
> > > Can any of you guys that recounted the results (yo
On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 11:53:51AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 09:23:02PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > >> Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Here's how people voted:
> > Can any of you guys that recounted the results (you know you did)
> > confirm th
On 29-Mar-01, 20:56 (CST), Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The thing is, you only get a vote over someone else if they marked it.
>
> IOW, if I only mark "--1--", then my vote is as good as nothing, since I
> made no preference of one over the other. So not specifying a rank in
> the or
> "Ben" == Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ben> The thing is, you only get a vote over someone else if they
Ben> marked it.
Right..
Ben> IOW, if I only mark "--1--", then my vote is as good as
Ben> nothing, since I made no preference of one over the other. So
Ben
On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 09:23:02PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> >> Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Here's how people voted:
> Can any of you guys that recounted the results (you know you did)
> confirm that the numbers are right?
Hmm, actually, I get different results too.
Ben Collins wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 11:53:51AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 09:23:02PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > > >> Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > Here's how people voted:
> > > Can any of you guys that recounted the results (y
On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 11:53:51AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 09:23:02PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > >> Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Here's how people voted:
> > Can any of you guys that recounted the results (you know you did)
> > confirm t
On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 09:23:02PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> >> Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Here's how people voted:
> Can any of you guys that recounted the results (you know you did)
> confirm that the numbers are right?
Hmm, actually, I get different results too.
>> Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here's how people voted:
Can any of you guys that recounted the results (you know you did)
confirm that the numbers are right? I can get those numbers only if I
make an assumption which a) I think is wrong b) throws some people's
votes out of the
>> Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here's how people voted:
Can any of you guys that recounted the results (you know you did)
confirm that the numbers are right? I can get those numbers only if I
make an assumption which a) I think is wrong b) throws some people's
votes out of th
28 matches
Mail list logo
