On Sun, 9 Feb 2020 at 19:17, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 2/9/20 7:14 PM, Alexis Hunt via agora-business wrote: > > * Assessor, as I'm dissatisfied with the sparse content of resolutions; > > What other content would you like in the resolutions? I'll also point > out there is more information at https://agoranomic.org/assessor/ since > I try to keep the messages short for the mailing list.
I would absolutely prefer to see the full version from that site posted to the mailing lists as it makes it much easier to work out. Last time I mentioned conditional votes I believe you didn't mention this site, and that was definitely one of the things. For this particular draft, I definitely dislike the lack of additional information about the proposal (class,chamber) and the way you show voting strength using only symbols, but I would reasonably accept an undertaking to address those as this is the first real resolution with the new system. It would be ideal I think if the voting strength calculation included, somewhere, at least a little breakdown of the calculation (e.g. +1 from Speaker, -1 from blots, +4 from office interest), but that's definitely going the extra mile. For many years, resolutions were done in table format, which I personally found easier to read, but I just realized this long predates you joining the game. Here's some examples: https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-official@agoranomic.org/msg07793.html or https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-official@agoranomic.org/msg04982.html Alexis -Alexis
