Matthew_Eric_Seitz@cup.portal.com (02/15/90)
The creation of a group is basicly the same as the adoption of a new clubs or groups bylaws. The name of an organization is normally part of the bylaws. The usual procedure is something like this A. A set of bylaws is proposed. The usenet equivalent of this is proposing a name and a charter. B. Each section is discussed and ammended. The usenet equivalent would be discussing and selecting a name for the group. C. Once each section is discussed and ammended, the bylaws (charter and name) are discussed as a whole. Ammendments are again entertained. D. The entire bylaws (charter and name) are then voted on. Since our debates are done via E-Mail, it is desireable to settle things with as few votes as possible. To accomplish this, and still maintain the basic structure above, I propose the following A vote consists of two parts. The first part is a list of preferential choices for the name of the group. The STV method of preferential transferrabl e voting would determine which name becomes the final name for the proposal. The second part of the vote would then be on whether the proposal as whole, name and charter would be acceptable. Since this vote may depend on the results of the first part of the vote, it is necessary to have conditional voting depending on which name wins. This would be done by listing those names that would cause you to vote yes on the entire proposal, which would cause you to vote no on the proposal, and which would cause you to abstain. The format could be of the form 23 Y23 N1 This would mean: My first preference for the name of the group is name 2. If this name is dropped, my next preference is for name 3. If this name is dropped, I abstain from further voting on the name. Further more, if either name 2 or name 3 is selected, I would vote yes for the proposal as a whole. If name 1 is selected, I would vote no on the proposal as a whole. If name 4 (or any other name) is selected, I would abstain from the vote on the proposal as a whole. I'll be posting a follow-up giving additional examples. Matt Matthew_Eric_Seitz@cup.portal.com C. T