Re: [spoon-discuss] Standard Voting

[Daniel Lepage <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sunday, September 28, 2003, at 07:24 AM, SkArcher wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: spoon-discuss-bounces@xxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:spoon-discuss-bounces@xxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Daniel Lepage
> > Sent: 28 September 2003 04:03
> > To: spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [spoon-discuss] Standard Voting
> >
> >
> > I've been thinking about the long-unused plans for a standard voting
> > procedure... Is this overly complicated?
>
> <SNIP>
>
> I would say that you should make the only voting termination points the
> checkpoints, at the very least, for ease of use. I personally was
> contemplating making the issuing of Ballots, counting of votes and 
> maybe a
> few other things a Duty, which is why I was asking about the time 
> locking
> remailer.

Well, the proto in its current form doesn't actually specify exact 
dates for anything; I think it would be more helpful to have a system 
that could be set to any time; when we actually use it, we can try to 
make sure that we only put the endings on checkpoints.

For example, the actual Ballot declaration would look something like 
this:
{{
The third checking period of each nweek is called the Voting period. At 
the beginning of it, a Poll is called on each Proposal made since the 
beginning of the last Voting period. Each of these Polls has a Duration 
of the end of the nweek, all players are Eligible Voters. Each Poll on 
an Unauthored Prop is Strict; all other Polls issued at this time are 
Imperial.
}}

Doing things like this should make it easier to change the system if 
new proposal types get added, etc; it also allows us to make Polls on 
other things that don't necessarily conform to the checking periods 
(for example, if Dave were to announce that e was taking a vacation, we 
could have a system set up to automatically launch a Poll to decide 
what we were going to do about it; and it would be good to have such a 
Poll end just before Dave left, regardless of whether the Clock was on 
or off).

--
Wonko

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GU/O d-(++)(?) s+:+ a--->+++ C++>++++>$ UB+>++++ P--@ L+>+++ E>++ 
W++(+++) N+(++) o?>++++ K? w------- O? M++ V- PS@ PE-@ Y-- PGP- t+ 5 X 
R+ tv--@ b+++@ DI++++ D G++ e*>++++ !h r++ y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss