On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 2:22 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
(d) If the valid options are ordered lists of preferences, the
outcome is decided using instant-runoff voting. In case
multiple valid preferences tie for the lowest number of
votes at any stage,
On Wed, 15 Jul 2015, omd wrote:
(d) If the valid options are ordered lists of preferences, the
outcome is decided using instant-runoff voting. In case of
a tie at any stage during the instant runoff, the vote
collector CAN and must, in the announcement of the
My gut reaction is AGAINST; ratification of an incorrect document was how I
shed my Champion title after an unwanted win.
—the Warrigal
On Wed, 15 Jul 2015, Tanner Swett wrote:
By the way, should I retract this proposal and resubmit it with a
clause installing me? I mean, I'm planning to take the office anyway.
I'll take your word for it this time... but I'm watching you... :P
Hey omd, been getting 404s on the agoranomic archives for the
past couple days... -G.
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 6:15 AM, Ørjan Johansen oer...@nvg.ntnu.no wrote:
I thought (and Wikipedia agrees) that IRV stages without a majority winner
(which includes any with a top tie) choose (one or more) losers, not a
winner.
Ah, yes. Thinko.
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 2:22 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
(d) If the valid options are ordered lists of preferences, the
outcome is decided using instant-runoff voting. In case
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 2:10 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 6:15 AM, Ørjan Johansen oer...@nvg.ntnu.no wrote:
I thought (and Wikipedia agrees) that IRV stages without a majority winner
(which includes any with a top tie) choose (one or more) losers, not a
winner.
On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:41:23 -0400
Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca wrote:
On Jul 16, 2015 16:40, Luis Ressel ara...@aixah.de wrote:
Player Used spending power (this week) total spending power
ais523 12
aranea 5
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Hey omd, been getting 404s on the agoranomic archives for the
past couple days... -G.
I think it's actually since yesterday, when I switched webservers... I
tested http://agoranomic.org, but forgot the list stuff.
I vote:
7763* scshunt 1.0 Official References
AGAINST; this seems like it doesn't accomplish anything at all
7764* scshunt 1.0 Prime Ministerial Perks
FOR
7765* scshunt 2.0 Centralization
FOR
7766* scshunt 1.0 Timelines
Conditional: FOR if ais523's vote is
On Thu, 16 Jul 2015, Luis Ressel wrote:
I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
Decision of whether to adopt it. For this decision, the vote collector
is the Assessor, and the valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is
also a valid vote).
Could you be a little
Also, has Agora tried approval voting lately? I think it's snazzy.
—the Warrigal
13 matches
Mail list logo
