/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

oranges wrote:which means I know that removing the etherals and IPC options leaves remove catgirls as the highest option, indicating that adding those two options did little to change the overall vote outcome, but giving us more detailed information about the levels of tradeoff people were willing to accept should catgirls be removed.

oranges wrote:it really doesn't though, you're suggesting that the existence of the etherals options would make someone who would previously rank keep higher than remove would suddenly now put it lower than remove, even though they can rank in the form, have etherals, keep cats, remove cats.

Why would they switch sides completely when tey can express that they want etherals but then otherwise would prefer to keep cats? the argument makes no sense jerry.

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:you did attempt voter bribery. You are not an impartial person and should never have gone within a thousand miles of this poll.

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

oranges wrote:it really doesn't though, you're suggesting that the existence of the etherals options would make someone who would previously rank keep higher than remove would suddenly now put it lower than remove, even though they can rank in the form, have etherals, keep cats, remove cats.

Why would they switch sides completely when tey can express that they want etherals but then otherwise would prefer to keep cats? the argument makes no sense jerry.

I already said this, people are not obligated to follow the "Rank options from most to least desired" instructions and they can and do vote based on external factors. The presence of now-removed bribery options can this way influence the other votes and continue to taint the poll.

Also, oranges, you have never responded to the fact that regardless of whether or not the bribery attempt was successful or necessary, you did attempt voter bribery. You are not an impartial person and should never have gone within a thousand miles of this poll.

oranges wrote:it really doesn't though, you're suggesting that the existence of the etherals options would make someone who would previously rank keep higher than remove would suddenly now put it lower than remove, even though they can rank in the form, have etherals, keep cats, remove cats.

Why would they switch sides completely when tey can express that they want etherals but then otherwise would prefer to keep cats? the argument makes no sense jerry.

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:

oranges wrote:it really doesn't though, you're suggesting that the existence of the etherals options would make someone who would previously rank keep higher than remove would suddenly now put it lower than remove, even though they can rank in the form, have etherals, keep cats, remove cats.

Why would they switch sides completely when tey can express that they want etherals but then otherwise would prefer to keep cats? the argument makes no sense jerry.

I already said this, people are not obligated to follow the "Rank options from most to least desired" instructions and they can and do vote based on external factors. The presence of now-removed bribery options can this way influence the other votes and continue to taint the poll.

Also, oranges, you have never responded to the fact that regardless of whether or not the bribery attempt was successful or necessary, you did attempt voter bribery. You are not an impartial person and should never have gone within a thousand miles of this poll.

somerandomguy wrote:...

oranges wrote:you're still suggesting that they would change their literal entire belief system because of two unrelated options

CreationPro wrote:i want to put cat ears on oranges

BONERMASTER wrote:

oranges wrote:you're still suggesting that they would change their literal entire belief system because of two unrelated options

What about those people that were undecided? What if someone thought "hey, catgirls aren't really my thing, but ethereals sound really cool, I'll vote them in instead!" Can you know how many people were aware that ethereals would have been added in anyway?

You made a vote that decided if cats were going to live or die, and you made the option to 1. Leave cats alive, 2. Kill cats and get $10.000. People voted to kill cats and it is revealed that everyone was going to get $10.000 regardless. Why do you think throwing in that money had no impact on the vote? Why do you think this vote is legitimate?

BONERMASTER wrote:

oranges wrote:you're still suggesting that they would change their literal entire belief system because of two unrelated options

What about those people that were undecided? What if someone thought "hey, catgirls aren't really my thing, but ethereals sound really cool, I'll vote them in instead!" Can you know how many people were aware that ethereals would have been added in anyway?

You made a vote that decided if cats were going to live or die, and you made the option to 1. Leave cats alive, 2. Kill cats and get $10.000. People voted to kill cats and it is revealed that everyone was going to get $10.000 regardless. Why do you think throwing in that money had no impact on the vote? Why do you think this vote is legitimate?

BONERMASTER wrote:

oranges wrote:you're still suggesting that they would change their literal entire belief system because of two unrelated options

What about those people that were undecided? What if someone thought "hey, catgirls aren't really my thing, but ethereals sound really cool, I'll vote them in instead!" Can you know how many people were aware that ethereals would have been added in anyway?

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:It is impossible to tell how the vote would have gone without those options. See https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 00#p453892 discussion chain

MrStonedOne wrote:

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:It is impossible to tell how the vote would have gone without those options. See https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 00#p453892 discussion chain

https://tgstation13.org/tgdb/irvpolltal ... Lk6Q%3D%3D

No its not.

MrStonedOne wrote:

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:It is impossible to tell how the vote would have gone without those options. See https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 00#p453892 discussion chain

https://tgstation13.org/tgdb/irvpolltal ... Lk6Q%3D%3D

No its not.

Screemonster wrote:I too change my opinions on whether I prefer steak or lasagne depending on whether there are burgers on the menu

CosmicScientist wrote:>eating lasagne

Grazyn wrote:Voting in an IRV poll is tricky. You don't want to put your second-best pick in the second place especially when you really want your first pick to win and you think the second-best will be favoured by most people. In this case, it was easy to predict that both pro-cats and anti-cats would pick "replace cats with ethereals" as the second-best option. So the best course of action for staunch pro-cats would've been to put the ethereal option as lower as possible, to prevent aggregation from boosting it up to the top.

Nilons wrote:itt: people didnt know how irv polling worked when they voted and now are upset

oranges wrote: how the fuck can you hold this conception of voting? it's not even close to true, staunch pro cat users should put keep at teh top and then put whatever the fuck they wanted next as their next option. What your second rank option is has absolutely zero bearing on the outcome unless
A) you first pick got eliminated, in which case you want to use your second pick
B) your first and second picks are both ranked last with equal vote count in an elimination round(in which case the option with the higher number of higher rankings wins - this by the way, is the total vote value tracked value)

Therefore, in all cases, the optimal strategy is literally just to order your votes to match exactly what you would like to happen in order, anything else is non optimal for you.

keep
swap
remove
etc.

Cobby wrote:If people don’t know how to vote tactically (lol) or tried to tactical vote but were crap at it, what does it matter? We’re not having another poll for a while and certainly not because voters “screwed up”

Grazyn wrote:

Cobby wrote:If people don’t know how to vote tactically (lol) or tried to tactical vote but were crap at it, what does it matter? We’re not having another poll for a while and certainly not because voters “screwed up”

No one is implying that so no need to get defensive, it's just good advice for future votes. It can apply to headmin elections too if you think that your candidate is the best and all the others are trash.

CosmicScientist wrote:Oh I geddit now, total vote value tracked. I didn't realise that was how eliminations/the winner was sorted because the rounds are shown instead as if useful. Why are options eliminated then instead of just saying dis is the highest vote value?

CosmicScientist wrote:Oh I geddit now, total vote value tracked. I didn't realise that was how eliminations/the winner was sorted because the rounds are shown instead as if useful. Why are options eliminated then instead of just saying dis is the highest vote value?

oranges wrote: B) your first and second picks are both ranked last with equal vote count in an elimination round(in which case the option with the higher number of higher rankings wins - this by the way, is the total vote value tracked value)

CosmicScientist wrote:Oh right I don't understand what's up with your decision making then.

Seems like a meme though unless either your group can commit to voting similarly or there are very few voters total, especially given it's the edge case of a tie.

BONERMASTER wrote:I think it would be very helpful for the future to not throw in unrelated goodies in a binary poll. I also think there are many other more important issues to start votes on, for example, removing oranges from the coding team... when do we hold the vote on that?

BONERMASTER wrote:removing oranges from the coding team... when do we hold the vote on that?

somerandomguy wrote:

BONERMASTER wrote:removing oranges from the coding team... when do we hold the vote on that?

when we have the vote to remove you from the server and forums

BONERMASTER wrote:I very rarely post comments on the github. I had no involvement on the PR.

somerandomguy wrote:

BONERMASTER wrote:removing oranges from the coding team... when do we hold the vote on that?

when we have the vote to remove you from the server and forums

In the spirit of this vote, I offer you a compromise:

Option 1: Leave everything as is
Option 2: Ban BONERMASTER forever ... and oranges, too.

You decide!

CosmicScientist wrote:

identify what you believe will be a popular option and try to keep its total vote value as low as possible, which means NOT selecting it as your second pick, even if you do have a slight preference for it, for the very reason you mentioned.

MrStonedOne wrote:Honestly I favor doing votes in any way that will fuck over people who over think votes.

Strategic voting is a net loss for democracy every time, and should be eradicated with mocking, votes rigged against it, and the fire of a thousand suns.

MrStonedOne wrote:Honestly I favor doing votes in any way that will fuck over people who over think votes.

Strategic voting is a net loss for democracy every time, and should be eradicated with mocking, votes rigged against it, and the fire of a thousand suns.

John Smith wrote:This isn't relegated to just the recent and controversial feline vote. It seems at every turn when it comes to counting votes the desired results of the people in charge somehow always become the default option, or the option with 4 ways of voting for it, and only a single way to vote against it. On top of this, they host the votes in rounds, rather then just taking the vote as it was from the outset, moving the default option to the one they wanted.

This happens with restart votes too. If you don't vote, you're counted as a no vote, rather then as not voting at all, so even if a voting majority decides to restart, the restart will more then likely not take place because the majority of players did not participate in the vote.

It doesn't matter what the vote is, the monarchs in charge will find a way to count them the way they want them to add up.