Subject: Re: [Socialnomic-VML] Proposal 96 - New Style

From: "Doctroid" <rsholmes@m...>
Date: 01 Sep 2000 10:33:56 -0400

"TopHeavy (A. Lawn)" <topheavy@s...> writes:

> A Rule-change can be Adopted if it satisfies one of the following 
> conditions:
> 
> The number of Votes FOR plus the number of Votes PASSIVE for the rule-
> change is greater than the number of Active Players divided by Two 
> and the rule-change has not been Retracted.
> 
> A Rule change can be Defeated if it satisfies one of the following 
> conditions:
> 
> The number of Votes AGAINST plus the number of Votes PASSIVE for the 
> rule change is greater than or equal to the number of Active Players 
> divided by Two.

Oy, how recalcitrant. By this rule, if I vote FOR a proposal, you and
Xylen vote AGAINST, and Oloros and GT vote PASSIVE (for instance),
then the rule can be Adopted! (or Defeated, either way, depending on
who gets to it first and which they'd rather do). Twice as many
AGAINST as FOR, but it can pass anyway!

That may be what you intended but I dislike it greatly.

-- 
- Rich Holmes
Syracuse, NY

---

From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@s...>
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 12:29:27 +1100

>That may be what you intended but I dislike it greatly.

Its actually the best option for "don't care" votes that's been submitted
so far. The problem with our past-the-post system is that a Pass vote
would possibly put a Proposal into Stasis, unable to be passed or failed.

In the scenario above, two Players express that they don't really mind
whether the proposal passes or not, but are happy to give it enough votes
to be adopted or defeated. Upon the first PASSIVE vote, the proposal is
able to be defeated, upon the second PASSIVE vote, it can be adopted or
defeated, although presumably there will be two Players lining up to defeat
it but only one wanting to adopt it. If it is adopted, three players were
happy (or at least not unhappy) for it to do so. Personally, I would only
vote PASSIVE to minor administrative proposals that don't do much harm or
good - because - to vote FOR such proposals is to encourage more of them
(clutter) - to vote AGAINST such proposals is to discourage them
unreasonably - and to not vote at all just leaves them latent.

SO that's what I think, I might even call it Expeditious

GT