Subject: MN: Re: Year 3 Week 25 Voting Results

From: Dunx <dunx@d...>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 6:15:39 EDT

Kevan wrote:
> I think only having three Active Voters is probably denting things
> unfairly, really.

Yes, well... I'm probably going to reactivate in a couple of weeks or so,
which may help.

> >[1] However, if people want to I'll propose [compulsory commenting for
> > AGAINST Votes]
> 
> Might be a good idea, actually, even if people just say "I agree with
> Player X's comments on the mailing list" or whatever. In a Nomic where
> the only motive to shoot down a proposal is its being Bad For The Game,
> this can't hurt, and could well be helpful.
> 
> Although I'm not sure how you'd word it to catch AGAINST Votes which
> carelessly lacked a comment - should they be ignored, or should the
> Voter merely lose Kudos?

I'd be inclined to ignore them. The Kudos penalty for indecisiveness would
then kick in.

The Proposal implementing this would have to be very carefully worded such
that the comment would have to be a meaningful explanation, rather than
arbitrary text.

Finally, the Voting Booth could be changed to reject AGAINST votes without
a comment, although obviously it wouldn't be able to gauge the relevance of
the text.

Cheers.

--
Dunx
"Fixing HTML is like trying to graft arms and legs onto a hamburger."
Ted Nelson