Note that I chose the Avengers for Whedon because it came out this year, but since election to the Hall of Fame is based on the total body of work, I'd like to point out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0O29rZiIRA
Ok. so I'm a bit slow onthe uptake and a tidbit for those similarly situated --if you click on the name, you are taken to information about and/or by that nominee. Better late than never.
Well, I don't think we got quorum, but of the people who did vote, three voted for the voting method I described, and one suggested that everyone votes for ten candidates, and the top ten total get in. Candidates that receive a minimum of three votes automatically on next year.
The problem with this is that I fully expect there to be, say, four candidates with seven votes and ten candidates with six votes, for example, which would leave us with fourteen people and no way of further narrowing it down. That's why I proposed the run-off system.
The majority voted that anyone who receives seven or more votes but doesn't make the top ten should be automatically on the ballot next year. I'm not sure whether that means in the first round or the second round; we need to clarify that.
Everyone agreed with the one-year moratorium on candidates who do not make it to the second round of voting. Unfortunately, I only just realized that begs the question of having two rounds, but oh well.
I think we may need to have an in-person vote when we're all together. CLA has other things on her mind right now, so I think she probably didn't get around to voting, and I'm sure none of the non-nominating voters did.
I don't mean to be endlessly regressive, but do the non-nominating voters get to pass on bye-laws? I say nay. I also say that we should adopt your proposed system. Ten inductees is the number we agreed upon, and it makes sense to provide for a run-off. The alternative would be to throw it to the House of Representatives, and we all know how they are.
Note that I chose the Avengers for Whedon because it came out this year, but since election to the Hall of Fame is based on the total body of work, I'd like to point out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0O29rZiIRA
ReplyDeleteI didn't know anything about Firefly when it aired, but one day I found this and I was sold.
ReplyDeleteOk. so I'm a bit slow onthe uptake and a tidbit for those similarly situated --if you click on the name, you are taken to information about and/or by that nominee. Better late than never.
ReplyDeleteSo how did the voting come out on the poll?
ReplyDeleteWell, I don't think we got quorum, but of the people who did vote, three voted for the voting method I described, and one suggested that everyone votes for ten candidates, and the top ten total get in. Candidates that receive a minimum of three votes automatically on next year.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with this is that I fully expect there to be, say, four candidates with seven votes and ten candidates with six votes, for example, which would leave us with fourteen people and no way of further narrowing it down. That's why I proposed the run-off system.
The majority voted that anyone who receives seven or more votes but doesn't make the top ten should be automatically on the ballot next year. I'm not sure whether that means in the first round or the second round; we need to clarify that.
Everyone agreed with the one-year moratorium on candidates who do not make it to the second round of voting. Unfortunately, I only just realized that begs the question of having two rounds, but oh well.
I think we may need to have an in-person vote when we're all together. CLA has other things on her mind right now, so I think she probably didn't get around to voting, and I'm sure none of the non-nominating voters did.
I don't mean to be endlessly regressive, but do the non-nominating voters get to pass on bye-laws? I say nay. I also say that we should adopt your proposed system. Ten inductees is the number we agreed upon, and it makes sense to provide for a run-off. The alternative would be to throw it to the House of Representatives, and we all know how they are.
ReplyDelete