About the sequence of options on the wiki poll:
One of the features of a wiki (though some consider it a bug) is that any
reader who seriously doesn't like some aspect of a page (in this case, of a
poll) can simply change it.
Yes, it's nice if a major change involves some discussion first, though it
is not required. Absent the discussion, though, a change is only a problem
if other users themselves seriously object to it, for they can likewise
change it back. At this point the most common thing is that discussion
starts. If a change war starts, ultimately, moderator intervention can
become necessary. That is rare.
So if a user thinks the sequence is inappropriate, probably the most
efficient response is to change it. If the user is right (i.e., the
sequence will skew the results), then this is potentially a problem with
the poll itself and changing it will either fix it, or bring the fact out
for discussion. If the user is wrong, it is also a reasonable outcome that
nobody else thinks the sequence matters, in which case no further
interaction is required on the issue.
We are accustomed to complaining about things we don't like. Certainly
that's not always unreasonable, but when we can actually make the change
ourselves, it does become a little ... whiny? ... to complain about it. The
state of nature is, in matters like this, disarray. Complaining about the
state of nature is like complaining about being born.
(This is not intended to criticize any individual, but to point out
something that I think important in considering political organization. The
usual problem is the non-existence of a desirable organization, and
complaining about that is tantamount to complaining about the state of
nature. Not terribly functional, unless it leads to organizing action.
Which it usually doesn't.)
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
