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
