grammaratzi.

I was not including punctuation

You forgot the second one.

wait

there

@CodesInChaos I always mess up the X and I with me and X

@AviD well just look at it from the least voted point of view... if the minority rule is not OK, then how come the lack of minority rules you out? Nobody voted against anyone, did we?

wat?

and there's plenty of other problems with it

@TildalWave That's what I say. Elections should include one updoot and one downdoot.

@AviD should I make a YouTube video? :D

@TildalWave huh?

@TildalWave did you watch those videos?

as he explained, the point is to get a candidate that the most people would accept.

@LucasKauffman Well, that's embarrassing.

@TerryChia TWSS

Cheers to @schroeder but imma shoot myself now.

@TerryChia because @Simon did better than you? Yeah, you'd better.

Can someone explain the process they use here for voting?

@AviD OK look... say you have 5 candidates ... A: 19%, B:19.5%, C:20%, D:20.5%, E:21% ... A is out

...

@AviD yes. Thanks for restating my pain.

@TildalWave are you talking FPTP?

@AviD that's what I commented on didn't I?

@TildalWave dunno, you're being ambiguous.

so yeah, FPTP does suck, whats your point?

but in FPTP #E would get in right away, with 21%

or they'd have a revote with the C D E

This is making my head hurt. I'm going back to playing with my microcontroller.

@DavidFreitag heeheehee

@AviD that vote transfer is BS too

@TildalWave STV?

why?

There isn't really a good solution, but STV is one of the lesser evils.

@CodesInChaos some say that anarchy is the best solution.

@AviD because it doesn't represent what voters would want during all the steps of the recount

@TildalWave no, it represents what each particular voter would want - at that given point.

if I knew that those voting for A would vote for E, I might have wanted to vote for D instead of C in the first place... and so on

@TildalWave bluh?

thats exactly what STV is fixing in FPTP

no no, ah bleah this is harder to explain than I thought

exactly.

I meant in the steps in between

STV has the problem that it eliminates candidates who'd receive many secondary votes but few primary votes before the transfer can happen.

@CodesInChaos truth.

In theory you'd like the candidate that'd win all pairwise voting duels, but that candidate often does not exist.

I do too!

but its still weighted towards primary votes, which while not perfect, makes more sense than the alternative

@CodesInChaos THIS. WE SHOULD MAKE ALL CANDIDATES DUEL EACH OTHER.

pistols or swords, I'm okay either way.

or grenades.

Ban hammers

@AviD OK look I guess what I wanted to say is that if there's n many vote transfers, there should also be this same n many candidates you could vote for in the same preferential order

@TildalWave the whole point is you shouldnt vote for everybody

@TildalWave So you're complaining about only being able to specify the top 3?

though 3 IS arbitrary

@AviD no, the whole point is you should rate everybody ... not vote at all

In our election that was indeed an issue, since 121 people didn't vote for the top candidates at all.

@TildalWave no, the point is you are marking the acceptable candidates.

Clearly this site is Eurocentric and no Western candidate stood a chance.

@CodesInChaos those are the lost votes, yes?

but that's still a minority.

121 is quite a lot.

@ScottPack Eurotrash, all of 'em.

I don't disagree.

but as @TildalWave says, they may have been amenable to mark him as their 4th.

@AviD Which is wrong, it gives me 3 to select from, in some preferential order ... and if I equal two or more? The point is, the system is forcing me to "select" at a fixed value relative to up to three candidates. Which it then shuffles as it pleases, because it's quite possible that it attributed my vote to someone I didn't even select in the first place.

@TildalWave I don't get that point.

no, your vote would never be attributed to someone you didnt select at all.

@AviD Oh then I didn't get that part. Sorz

the point is that the final result, while not necessarily everyone's first choice, is acceptable to the greatest number of voters.

If your first choice has been eliminated, your vote is transferred to your second choice. If that candidate is eliminated as well, it goes to the third choice.

@TildalWave when your "current" candidate is eliminated, your vote is transfered to your next available selection.

ah OK I get it now

it's still BS tho :)

@TildalWave Imagine if your 1st choice got 3 points, 2nd got 2, and 3rd got 1. Then it was a straight sum. It's similar.

Democracy is bullshit, but the alternatives are even shittier.

the "Exhausted" are the voters who didnt select the current available candidates at all.

@CodesInChaos Thank you, 21st century Churchill.

@ScottPack But it's not like this, is it? Yet that's how we vote.

@ScottPack similar, but not quite. Order of elimination messes with that.

As long as your first choice is in the game, your second choice doesn't get any vote from you at all.

Right n it's a similar idea but different in the details and easier to Brock.

@ScottPack it should have been like this, that was my whole point about "rating instead of voting"

can we give a negative rating?

Rating encourages tactical voting.

@CodesInChaos is there such a thing as a non-tactical voting?

@CodesInChaos And ordering doesn't?

@ScottPack To a much smaller degree.

Like your face?

imagine a scenario where a candidate is noone's first choice, but everyone's 2nd choice.

then there's this

@AviD I'm slacking on my abuse this month. Also, I my "aggravation of mortals" stat is kinda low. Let's do it.

You guys are still talking about voting?

@DavidFreitag yes, we decided to vote you off the island.

@AviD Good, I'm on a boat anyways.

Ohmigod! Could you imagine a Survivor-style show with STV islandvoting?

Voting should go like this: @ThomasPornin selects someone. We all shuddup & @Simon sends us all donuts. Everyone is happy. The End.

So say we all.

@LucasKauffman Yeah not gonna lie, that's indeed bullshit.

@Amelia THEM? THERE'S MORE THAN ONE ME?

@Simon Yes, you have DID.

I have did?

Ah, right. Didn't know the acronym in English.

@Simon LOL! Source?

@Gilles reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/3excpy/…

Congrats to @schroeder

@TildalWave - non-tactical voting is voting with ICBMs.

@DeerHunter Inter-Continental Baby Maker's?

@David - yup. Almost...

For any number of candidates >2, there's no tactical voting-proof scheme.

@DeerHunter ... except that one

@ThomasPornin - typing frpm mobile. I was also going to add collusion to the list :(

@DeerHunter Mobile everything sucks.

@Simon My Nexus 9 seems to handle mobile quite well.

@Simon - especially when someone sends you an MMS.

@DavidFreitag pls

@DeerHunter Yeeeep.

gsmarena.com/oneplus_2-6902.php

Oneplus 2 specs ^

(finally)

4 GB RAM?

Talk about overkill.

Noteworthyness - 64GB / 4GB ram, no SD card, and no NFC.

Any estimates on number of users who've got Stage Fright already?

@DavidFreitag You forgot about USB-C.

@DeerHunter I can't tell, I've embedded my head within a large bucket of sand

Also, the oneplus 2 has a dual sim. Which is odd.

Tasty tasty saand

@DavidFreitag So you can make a call while you're calling.

@Simon - and then go recursive all the way down

DEFCON horror stories...

@Gilles Hahahaha, Awkward.

@DavidFreitag it would have been more awkward if it had been posted on the sex.se room rather than embedded.se

@Gilles No, I don't think so. It would still be just as awkward.

Probably less awkward.