13-02-2003 06:08									#61
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Well... how are we going to do both anonymous and this system (which works a lot better)?

We really can't.

It would be preferable to name a supposedly neutral person to collect ballots (via PM) and handle the system that way.

I would think that one of the judges from the SPDG might be workable. Togas, jdjdjd, Sheik, or Nimitz would all work (GK has problems with getting online right now).

Or, if I am not running, I would be willing to collect ballots and do the counting as well (since I know how this system is correctly counted).

Just an idea...

If people don't like that, we don't have to it that way. We'll need to find another system, though no system will be as good.

	13-02-2003 07:11									#62
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

When votes are counted manually it is typical to have at least two vote counters. That provides a check, eases peoples concerns about fairness, while still allowing for secret ballot. If this is done by e-mail then each voter will have to send his ballot to each of the counters. After all votes are received each counter will tally the results. The counters then compare results. If there is a disagreement then each counter rechecks their tally. If the disagreement continues they would compare ballots. Any voter that does not submit an identical vote to each counter should have their vote discarded as invalid.

Robert's Rules of Order describes a number of voting methods. One is similar to the Australian voting method. I don't have my book handy but it goes something like this... Everyone lists the all the candidates in the order of their preference from first choice to last choice. Each ballot is placed in a pile based on their first choice. The candidate with the lowest number of votes is removed. All the ballots in that pile have their first choice scratched off and are then replaced into the other piles based on their next choice. You continue removing the lowest pile, scratching off names, and redistributing those ballots until you have a winner (or winners) with the required number of votes. The only difference with the Australian method is the fractional vote when a candidate has more than enough votes.

	13-02-2003 08:46									#63
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I am willing to volunteer to count votes. HarryH's suggestions are excellent. Perhaps myself and another Judge from the SPDG will both serve in the mannor HarryH describes above.

--Togas

	13-02-2003 08:57									#64
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by HarryH Robert's Rules of Order describes a number of voting methods. One is similar to the Australian voting method. I don't have my book handy but it goes something like this...

Yes, that’s the method used when there is only one candidate to be elected.

	13-02-2003 08:59									#65
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Togas I am willing to volunteer to count votes. HarryH's suggestions are excellent. Perhaps myself and another Judge from the SPDG will both serve in the mannor HarryH describes above. --Togas

I am also volunteering too. That way if one of the Judges has a wish to run for Consul he can feel free to do so.

	13-02-2003 10:34									#66
	Get a bigger avatar today!

For the record... I HATE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER... they are absolutely anachronistic in terms of an orderly system of parliamentary procedure. There are several other orderly systems of parli pro out there which don't have the many annoying anachronisms and inefficiencies which make Robert's Rules so aggravating...

But I digress... I have a copy of Robert's Rules as well

	13-02-2003 20:29									#67
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I would be willing to count votes as well.

	13-02-2003 21:48									#68
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

btw... because we are elected THREE consults and not one, we should use the Australian system with the exchange of the vote fractions because it ensures that people who vote for the most popular candidate don't waste most of their votes and tiny minorities elect the other two.

The reason to use the Australian system to ensure actual majority support (or close to it) rather than elected leaders on tiny tiny populations because those were the only people who didn't vote for the most popular guy.... that causes people to wonder if they should vote for their REAL choice (notyoueither, for instance), or bet that others will do it for them and vote for someone else... but then run the risk that too many people will do what they did and notyoueither will actually lose!

No...

Just use the Australian system. It will ensure that candidates who are the most popular actually make it and that their voters don't abandon them thinking they can help other candidates w/o damaging their main choice.

	14-02-2003 00:58									#69
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I had the "Irish" system in mind when writing the thing, but now I must say I prefer Arnelos' Austrailian system . However, I never considered the need for anonynimty. The whole Consul system is somewhat realpolitik, and I assumed the voting system would be similar. I envisioned a thread in which people named the three they liked most out in the open. I still think thats the way it should be.

	14-02-2003 01:05									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Of Thud's avatar into the spirit getting...

Australian system prefer I; much more fun is. But with three don’t have to stop they. All candidates, or as many as please they can rank they.

	14-02-2003 01:07									#71
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Arnelos Just use the Australian system. It will ensure that candidates who are the most popular actually make it and that their voters don't abandon them thinking they can help other candidates w/o damaging their main choice.

Arnelos, you explain it so persuasively ; you should have Enid Lakeman as your avatar