Post by Judge Sam on Jul 19, 2009 13:10:33 GMT -5
The following is a partial transcript from the sixth and final Union meeting. To read the first transcript click here, to read the second transcript click here, and to read the fifth transcript click here.
"I'm so sad."
"How come?"
"This is our final voting shift!"
"I know. They've been great haven't they?"
"Definitely. So many cool different ways to vote... makes all those times we voted normally seem lame in comparison. Who knew there was so many varied ways to come to a group decision on one person to Exile?"
"I never would have thought it. So what's your final voting system?"
"Well, I thought about doing +/- voting again. The thing is, these voting systems are all so interesting and varied yet we only did them once. Only one specific time! There are so many different ways each could have turned out.
For example, +/- voting. We saw it happen once but what if it happened every week? What if people had more time to get used to it, develop strategies, and play their votes tactically? And then what if other people responded to those tactics with their own tactics? Doing it over and over again could produce such interesting results."
"Yeah."
"And it's not only that. When we did +/- voting in two teams we saw it applied to two different situations. One where Paris was pretty much the majority, and another where it was close between two people. But there are far more situations than just those. What if we had a close vote between three people, like at the last Exile, how would the vote have turned out then if we used +/- voting? What if we had a vote where it looked like there was a clear majority, but everyone had silent reservations, so tons of people minus'd that majority person and someone else went? What if we had a connection of closely-connected Spies, how would that affect the vote?"
"There are so many possibilities..."
"And it's not only just that! Each vote is different depending on when during the game you use it. Depending on how many people are voting. Can you imagine how Consensus Voting would be different between a group of 21 people than with a group of 5? What if we had done +/- at the final five, how would that change things as opposed to doing it with 16 people? Each time would be a totally different feel."
"Wow that's right, I hadn't thought of that before."
"We've really just scratched the surface of these voting twists. I'd be really interested to dig deep into any one of them. Maybe we could have a whole game with one of the voting twists!"
"Okay, enough about the past voting twists, what's this final one?"
"Well, you know, there's one thing that's been constant about every other vote so far. Something that we didn't have to do, but chose to. So far, everyone has had to put all their votes, in whichever form they took, towards one person. Even with Instant-Runoff Voting, you only ever voted for one person at one time. That's been true for every system."
"And..."
"But why do you have to vote for just one person at Exile? What if you could vote for two, or more?"
"I'm so sad."
"How come?"
"This is our final voting shift!"
"I know. They've been great haven't they?"
"Definitely. So many cool different ways to vote... makes all those times we voted normally seem lame in comparison. Who knew there was so many varied ways to come to a group decision on one person to Exile?"
"I never would have thought it. So what's your final voting system?"
"Well, I thought about doing +/- voting again. The thing is, these voting systems are all so interesting and varied yet we only did them once. Only one specific time! There are so many different ways each could have turned out.
For example, +/- voting. We saw it happen once but what if it happened every week? What if people had more time to get used to it, develop strategies, and play their votes tactically? And then what if other people responded to those tactics with their own tactics? Doing it over and over again could produce such interesting results."
"Yeah."
"And it's not only that. When we did +/- voting in two teams we saw it applied to two different situations. One where Paris was pretty much the majority, and another where it was close between two people. But there are far more situations than just those. What if we had a close vote between three people, like at the last Exile, how would the vote have turned out then if we used +/- voting? What if we had a vote where it looked like there was a clear majority, but everyone had silent reservations, so tons of people minus'd that majority person and someone else went? What if we had a connection of closely-connected Spies, how would that affect the vote?"
"There are so many possibilities..."
"And it's not only just that! Each vote is different depending on when during the game you use it. Depending on how many people are voting. Can you imagine how Consensus Voting would be different between a group of 21 people than with a group of 5? What if we had done +/- at the final five, how would that change things as opposed to doing it with 16 people? Each time would be a totally different feel."
"Wow that's right, I hadn't thought of that before."
"We've really just scratched the surface of these voting twists. I'd be really interested to dig deep into any one of them. Maybe we could have a whole game with one of the voting twists!"
"Okay, enough about the past voting twists, what's this final one?"
"Well, you know, there's one thing that's been constant about every other vote so far. Something that we didn't have to do, but chose to. So far, everyone has had to put all their votes, in whichever form they took, towards one person. Even with Instant-Runoff Voting, you only ever voted for one person at one time. That's been true for every system."
"And..."
"But why do you have to vote for just one person at Exile? What if you could vote for two, or more?"
I will leave you with this:
