Surely you agree that the majority of teams wanted barbarians, so how is it fair to have a repoll and possibly end up with none, directly against what the teams voted?
UN Vote: Barbarian Level
- Thread starter RegentMan
- Start date
Niklas said:
If it does, then that means the team polls were organized badly. If a team simply listed all choices then picked the one that had a plurality of votes, then you are right that their choice might change given a new election. A properly run team poll would not lead to an outcome of "Raging" if a majority would choose "None" in a head-to-head poll. Personally, I see no reason to let teams change their vote because they don't know how to run an election the first time
.I'd just go with the admins ruling even though it isn't my personal first choice so we can move on.
Robi D
Minister of (Dis)Order
I don't have a clue what your trying to say Chamnix.
Other then that i'm happy that the admins decided so we can move on to other things.
Other then that i'm happy that the admins decided so we can move on to other things.
fe3333au
Deity
Agreed ... on both statements 
Maybe you are right in that a poll with the outcome of none would not be fair given what the teams voted in this first round. But I neither do I think that trying to "average" the result in a poll with only a partial order is fair.
My example: My personal vote was none, as previously noted. My second preference would certainly not have been sedentary, as the averaging reasoning goes, but raging. Given the close call of our team's vote (and some inside intel), had I cast my vote on raging instead then that would have been our teams decision, and thus the majority in the UN as well.
But hey, I don't expect you to listen to my ranting. In fact, I find this a truly minor issue and would be glad if we moved on to more important stuff. I guess I just wanted to point out the fallacies of false averaging over partially ordered polls, which is often a real problem in real life statistics. If you admins think we should move on with restless, then let's move on with restless. I would in fact have been happy to let you (or Rik) choose in the first place. But the statistician in me will not agree that it was the reasonable outcome of the poll.
My example: My personal vote was none, as previously noted. My second preference would certainly not have been sedentary, as the averaging reasoning goes, but raging. Given the close call of our team's vote (and some inside intel), had I cast my vote on raging instead then that would have been our teams decision, and thus the majority in the UN as well.
But hey, I don't expect you to listen to my ranting. In fact, I find this a truly minor issue and would be glad if we moved on to more important stuff. I guess I just wanted to point out the fallacies of false averaging over partially ordered polls, which is often a real problem in real life statistics. If you admins think we should move on with restless, then let's move on with restless. I would in fact have been happy to let you (or Rik) choose in the first place. But the statistician in me will not agree that it was the reasonable outcome of the poll.
?
SimpleMonkey
King
Please. Done is done. Restless it is.
Now this is real democrazy. The rulers rule what nobody really wanted (bacause nobody could point out what we all wanted) - nobody can (or wants to) stop it and we will all find out how to live with it - and it works 
And of course the most important factor: The issue the decision was taken on is so unimportant that nobody wants to talk this over for other then principle reasons and everybody is happy to go on with real life...
This is what German politics is like since the early eighties...
(to make clear: I can live with that decision and don't want to critizise it but wanted to show this example of the weakness of the system...)
And of course the most important factor: The issue the decision was taken on is so unimportant that nobody wants to talk this over for other then principle reasons and everybody is happy to go on with real life...
This is what German politics is like since the early eighties...
(to make clear: I can live with that decision and don't want to critizise it but wanted to show this example of the weakness of the system...)
AutomatedTeller
Frequent poster
This is only really an issue if someone is expansionist - an expansionist civ wants sedentary, because then there are huts to pop, but no barb camps to spawn barbs to strike down the defenseless scouts.
at least, that's the way I see it.
at least, that's the way I see it.
azzaman333
meh
Admin desicion is final is perfectly fine with me personally.
Daghdha
Absent Minded
Team GONG said let admin's decide and we stand by that (but I'd be a liar if I said we were happy with restless barbs. That put aside we're happy as drunken campers).
Beorn-eL-Feared
Idiot riding pedals
Awesome post thatPaul#42 said:Now this is real democrazy. The rulers rule what nobody really wanted (bacause nobody could point out what we all wanted) - nobody can (or wants to) stop it and we will all find out how to live with it - and it works
And of course the most important factor: The issue the decision was taken on is so unimportant that nobody wants to talk this over for other then principle reasons and everybody is happy to go on with real life...
This is what German politics is like since the early eighties...
RFHolloway
Analyst in the UK
Beorn-eL-Feared said:Awesome post that
What he said
seems to sum up this whole democracy thing (which is why I stick to feudalism
)
donsig
Low level intermediary
Nobody is everywhere. Although not in the same numbers...Is Nobody even on any of the teams?
AutomatedTeller
Frequent poster
What did we decide on for barbs? Restless? Random? Rik decides? Roaming?
Tubby Rower
Chronic Slacker
Restless was the decision. it was made based off of an average of the team votes.
Similar threads
