On 15 January 2012 15:24, Tanner Swett <swe...@mail.gvsu.edu> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 9:15 AM, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Amend Rule 1950 by replacing the text
>> {
>> Adoption index is a switch possessed by Agoran decisions, whose value is
>> either "none" (default) or an integral multiple of 0.1 from 1.0 to 9.9.
>> } with the text
>> {
>> Adoption index is a switch possessed by Agoran decisions, whose value is
>> either "none" (default) or an integral multiple of 0.1 greater than
>> or equal to 1.0.
>> }.
>> }.
>
> The reason there's an upper limit is that someone once submitted a
> proposal with an adoption index hundreds of digits long. The only
> reasonable solution, I think, is to limit adoption indices to exactly
> 35.
>
> —Machiavelli
Shouldn't adoption indices be capped to the maximum number of votes
which may be cast on that proposal.
So, if there are N players, each with 1 vote to cast on a proposal
submitted, any adoption index greater or equal to N would require
unanimity to pass (because if 1 player votes against it there are only
(N-1) players to vote in favour, so it will never meet the adoption
index).
This becomes a problem if the number of votes available to cast does
not remain constant through the voting period - although that could be
fixed by allowing adoption indices to be a linear function of
MaxVotes, and setting any adoption index greater MaxVotes to
MaxVotes.
Arkady
