A vote like: vote any player whose name begins w/ J, else PRESENT is just fine and presents no problems.
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 3:21 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: > I meant ban any vote like > 1. Jeff > 2. PRESENT. > > I would count that vote as just a vote for Jeff. > > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Josh T <draconicdarkn...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I typed up a long response and then realized that I think we might have >> differing ideas of what it means to talk about "whole votes", thus I am >> going to ask; what did you mean by "count PRESENT as a whole vote"? >> >> 天火狐 >> >> On 14 September 2017 at 23:48, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> That's a conditional, which is totally different. G's here talking >>> about an instant runoff ballot of >>> 1. Jeff >>> 2. PRESENT >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Josh T <draconicdarkn...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > It sounds like having endorse or PRESENT as the tail of a list of votes >>> > is >>> > acceptable. This allows things like "I endorse A, unless eir vote >>> > indicates >>> > preference for B, in which case my vote is PRESENT." >>> > >>> > 天火狐 >>> > >>> > On 14 September 2017 at 19:09, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> My current policy is to count PRESENT as a whole vote. Endorse can't >>> >> be a whole vote bc people keep saying things like "vote CB, else >>> >> endorse G". My current policy is to count that vote as a list of {CB, >>> >> all of G's votes in order except for the vote for CB, which is first} >>> >> >>> >> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 5:00 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > On Thu, 14 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote: >>> >> >> I have no idea how to handle PRESENT in runoff voting. Is it a >>> >> >> replacement >>> >> >> for the whole list, or is it an option on the list? If it's the >>> >> >> first >>> >> >> option >>> >> >> on a ranked voting, is PRESENT "eliminated" if it doesn't win, so my >>> >> >> vote doesn't >>> >> >> end up counting towards quorum? And what happens if PRESENT is the >>> >> >> majority? >>> >> >> is everyone else eliminated? I'm not sure if the "standard >>> >> >> definition >>> >> >> of instant >>> >> >> runoff" covers this. So let's test that in some slightly-less >>> >> >> essential offices. >>> >> >> Fun!! >>> >> > >>> >> > This question is also a concern for endorsements. >>> >> > >>> >> > Take the following results votes for voters P...Z for candidates >>> >> > A..G, >>> >> > then my >>> >> > vote: >>> >> > >>> >> > P: {A, B, C} >>> >> > Q: {A, B, C} >>> >> > R: {A, B, C} >>> >> > >>> >> > S: {D, E, F} >>> >> > T: {D, E, F} >>> >> > U: {D, E, F} >>> >> > >>> >> > Z: {G, A} >>> >> > >>> >> > Me: {endorse Z, D} >>> >> > >>> >> > From first-choices, we have A=3, D=3, G=2 (1 certain G, 1 >>> >> > endorsement). >>> >> > >>> >> > G is eliminated. >>> >> > >>> >> > So if we eliminate my first conditional choice, "endorse Z", then the >>> >> > second >>> >> > vote on my list is for D, D wins. >>> >> > >>> >> > But if we keep my "endorse Z" vote, and G is eliminated, then I'm >>> >> > endorsing Z's >>> >> > second choice, and A wins. >>> >> > >>> >> > Which is right, if either? >>> >> > >>> >> > The only way I can really make sense of this is if PRESENT and >>> >> > Endorse >>> >> > are >>> >> > whole votes (i.e. substitute for the whole list, not part of a list). >>> >> > But >>> >> > I'm not sure if the rules say that, or are broken? >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> -- >>> >> From V.J. Rada >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> From V.J. Rada >> >> > > > > -- > From V.J. Rada -- >From V.J. Rada