Final Strident Atheist election date & rules (2011)

Page 1 of 1 [ 10 posts ] 

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

14 May 2011, 4:51 pm

Okay, screw all this, everything will occur like last year (with the exception of the nomination process). By May 20 we'll have a pre-final round of all nominees and on June 1-June 7 we'll have the final election for the three positions on the Committee of WP Strident Atheists. The final election will include the top 4 candidates.

Final Round:

Votes needed = (votes cast/(3 +1)) +1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Tra ... _the_votes


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


Last edited by Master_Pedant on 16 May 2011, 12:55 am, edited 6 times in total.

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

14 May 2011, 6:16 pm

You realize you will need at least 56 entries on the poll to accommodate your planned system with 8 candidates? That's slightly ridiculous. I'm not even sure if the forum software will allow such a monstrous poll.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

14 May 2011, 6:19 pm

Orwell wrote:
You realize you will need at least 56 entries on the poll to accommodate your planned system with 8 candidates? That's slightly ridiculous. I'm not even sure if the forum software will allow such a monstrous poll.

I agree with Orwell's criticism. A transferable vote is not practical in any meaningful sense for 8 candidates. We need to cut the number in half to have 4 final candidates. That's that. I will not allow the monster you propose to exist and fight it's existence to the death.



Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

15 May 2011, 11:11 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Orwell wrote:
You realize you will need at least 56 entries on the poll to accommodate your planned system with 8 candidates? That's slightly ridiculous. I'm not even sure if the forum software will allow such a monstrous poll.

I agree with Orwell's criticism. A transferable vote is not practical in any meaningful sense for 8 candidates. We need to cut the number in half to have 4 final candidates. That's that. I will not allow the monster you propose to exist and fight it's existence to the death.


Err ... okayish.


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

15 May 2011, 11:21 am

You should have an option for each of the n! permutations of candidates.

Then you could run Schulze's method on the results.


_________________
.


Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

15 May 2011, 2:55 pm

And Orwell, technically, if nobody gets enough votes in the first round of STV counting, the person with the least votes is eliminated and their second preferences are redistributed.


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

16 May 2011, 12:26 am

Back to business as usual (as in business as in 2010).


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


Last edited by Master_Pedant on 16 May 2011, 12:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

16 May 2011, 12:36 am

You do realize that a ranked ballot system with a large number of candidates is going to be somewhat insane, don't you? Especially given that someone has to tally all of this. Keep track of it. And so on and so forth, most of which is easily done with a poll, and easily done by a poll WITHOUT the possibility of human error. And then y'know, you have misspellings, write-ins, and all of this other crap that just makes it insane.

Stop f***ing with us, and keep the whole matter constant rather than making this a political experiment.



Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on 16 May 2011, 12:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

16 May 2011, 12:45 am

Ho, it's getting really heated in here. Cool.



Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

16 May 2011, 1:01 am

Orwell wrote:
You realize you will need at least 56 entries on the poll to accommodate your planned system with 8 candidates? That's slightly ridiculous. I'm not even sure if the forum software will allow such a monstrous poll.


When playing with the poll in a thread I didn't post, I managed to add 21 (I stopped due to boredom, I don't know how many options I may actually have been able to add).


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/