Why monarchies fail.

[thedarkfinder]

So from ambiguous you've gone to downright incomprehensible?

6. A person suggested has to collect at least 60 voices for no, with 1/3 or less of positive voice count for, so a candidate needs 3:1 ratio of positive to negative votes (minimum 75% votes for yes and maximum 25% for no)

Yes. Seems so.

Let us break this down.

60+ votes, she has.

With 1/3 or less of positive voice count for... - So she has to have 60 votes, but only 1/3 of the votes can vote for her. So she needs 60 plus votes with only 20 votes for her. That is impossible. You can not have 33% against her, 67% for her, and 60% of the 67% that is for her, to be against her. What you want is... 67% of the people that vote for her, out of those you want 60% to vote against her.

Then you say
so a candidate needs 3:1 ratio of positive to negative votes (minimum 75% votes for yes and maximum 25% for no)
- which means the whole voting system is messed up. Because you stated at the beginning that you only wanted 33% against her. It seems once a person reach a goal, you move the post.

So you are saying no matter what, no one is gm and this was just another social experiment?

[enchilado]

It means that the Positive votes are three times the Negative, NOT that the Negative are one third of the Positive. No more than 1/3 of the votes may be Negative.

Do you understand?

[melkior]

a) Thank you for quoting me before the post was deleted, although this one may end up having the same fate.

b) I'm almost convinced the whole "vote for the new GM" thingy is just something to occupy the players with.

c) It's amazing how one third turns into a 1:3 ratio which is actually one quarter.

d) And of course, changing the rules so they move the goal further away once it's been reached is completely in accordance with b).

Fun, huh?

[enchilado]

a) Thank you for quoting me before the post was deleted, although this one may end up having the same fate.
- Save it to a text document

b) I'm almost convinced the whole "vote for the new GM" thingy is just something to occupy the players with.
- Of course, I realised that from the first

c) It's amazing how one third turns into a 1:3 ratio which is actually one quarter.
- Would you rather you had no say in the matter at all?

d) And of course, changing the rules so they move the goal further away once it's been reached is completely in accordance with b).

- Yep. Brilliant, isn't it?

[thedarkfinder]

It means that the Positive votes are three times the Negative, NOT that the Negative are one third of the Positive. No more than 1/3 of the votes may be Negative.

Do you understand?

Which is it. 3x more positive then neg. Or 1/3 votes negative.

1 vote negative and 2 positive votes= 3 total votes with 1 out of 3 voting negative or 1/3. 4 votes positive 2 votes negative= total votes of 6, 2 out of 6 votes for . Which is 33%. Not 25%

Ignoring syntactic of the problem. She wants 1 negtive vote for 3 postive votes. Total votes 4. Ratio 1:4. (25 out of a 100%). 1 out of the 4 is negative. Which is 1 out of 4. Or 1:4

The biggest number is the total number of items in a whole ratio. 1:3 is 1 positive vote and 2 negtive votes. 3:1 is 300% of the object. You have 3 times the amount.

But she wants the smaller portion out of the larger sample. She wants 1 part apples to 3 part oranges. Total apples and orange 4. Total percentage of apples to oranges 75%. Or 1 out 4 is and apple. Or 1:4 is an apple to oranges.

From the wikipedia

Proportions

If the two or more ratio quantities encompass all of the quantities in a particular situation, for example two apples and three oranges in a fruit basket containing no other types of fruit, it could be said that "the whole" contains five parts, made up of two parts apples and three parts oranges. In this case, \tfrac{2}{5}, or 40% of the whole are apples and \tfrac{3}{5}, or 60% of the whole are oranges. This comparison of a specific quantity to "the whole" is sometimes called a proportion. Proportions are sometimes expressed as percentages as demonstrated above.

Now she wants was to do percentage out of a ratio, which is impossible to do. 3 of x, 1 of y.
Wiki again
Number of terms

In general, a ratio of 2:3 means that the amount of the first quantity is \tfrac{2}{3} (two thirds) of the amount of the second quantity. However, a ratio with more than two terms cannot be completely converted into a single fraction; a single fraction represents only one part of the ratio. If the ratio deals with objects or amounts of objects, this is often expressed as "for every two parts of the first quantity there are three parts of the second quantity".

If you are still confused

Please try this.

http://www.shodor.org/UNChem/math/r_p/index.html

It is simple chemistry. That any one should know.

[Crush]

I think you are seeing a conspiracy while there is just a misunderstanding.

Remember that English is not Platynas first language.

[enchilado]

The trouble is, everybody hates Platyna. Most of them for no reason. They hear old players talking about how terrible she is, and so the n00bs hate her, even though they've never spoken to her. I have no problem with Platyna, indeed I like her as much as anyone else - although it may be because she's never done anything bad to me - and I read those rules without prejudice.

And if she does want to keep making the amount of votes higher and higher, so what? Does it really matter?

[thedarkfinder]

I think you are seeing a conspiracy while there is just a misunderstanding.

Remember that English is not Platynas first language.

But math is universal. We are not arguing language we arguing math.

She first wanted 300% of the vote to be yes. Which is point less. coverting that number to correct format. She wanted 1 vote no out of 3 total votes. or 1:3 ratio.

if you do not beleive me. Fine.

here is the example. You have 13 women to 27 men. You have 13:27. You have 13/27. You have .48 are women. 48% are women.


You have 1 no vote to 3 yes votes. 1:3. What percentage is a no vote 1/3=?

She is confusing proportions to ratios. She wanted a proportion and now wants a ratio.

Why because the ratio was and will be the bigger number. And scales against its self.

She is also demanding a proportion or of an ratio.

She wants her cake and eat it too.

[enchilado]

I can't even be bothered reading that when you start of by saying "math is universal" and go on to say "300% of the votes".

[Platyna]

I wanted a quorum of players to elect a new GM, and I did not changed it, it was original thought.

I gave you a way to take part in the decision on how to make a GM. Keep you occupied? I will tell it in straight and brutal way - it is absolute monarchy, I do not get paid to get more people to play this game, and since most of our players doesn't give a damn about politics and plot theories the game success is safe.

I do not even play this game, I have a lot of studies (now there is 03:34 AM and I have interrupted my chemistry study to answer your moaning, while I have an exam at 10 AM). I left this project and I came back, guess why? Yes...because community called me, by countless emails and PMs. Therefore I don't have to keep you occupies by any means, since first: 1. I don't care about moaning because of reasons stated above, 2. I have a great credit to make crucial decisions concerning this community, as I do since almost five years, and since most if not all were good ones, and I do put my time and my thoughts, out of sentiment, to this project and those people. So, cut this bullshit.

Regards

[theauroraproject]

killifish, stop, now.

[Kage]

I have a lot of studies (now there is 03:34 AM and I have interrupted my chemistry study to answer your moaning, while I have an exam at 10 AM).

You know... studies show cramming is actually counter effective

[daemonowner]

i hate to break it to you but 13 women for 27 men is 13w/40people

[thedarkfinder]

i hate to break it to you but 13 women for 27 men is 13w/40people

which is my point.

You can not confuse portions to ratios.

Ratios are whole things.

1 woman is 100% woman.
1 man is 100% man.

You can not have 1 of 3 parts of the man be a woman, and count it as woman.

She is say a ratio of 3:1. She is saying she has "3 full units" of "1 unit" or 300% of that unit.

If you have a room with 13 women and 27 men. You have 48% less women then men. Or a ratio of 13:27. <---she was asking for this. There to be 33% less no votes per yes votes.

If you want to know the total ratio of people to women, you have to count total possible units, 40 then take 13 from that. Which is 13/40 of the people are women. In this case 33% of the total population is women. <----but changed to this because it was a greater number.

Since portions scale better then ratios, she wants a ratio, basically making it impossible to get her magic number. She is playing a math game with us, redefining units.

It is moving the bar. Asking for 1/3 not 1/4.

she was asking the ratio between the yes and no votes. Now she is asking for the ratio between the yes votes and the total votes.

[meeps]

It's a horrific way to elect new GMs anyways, being popular means you're too connected to the people within the game to be an effective GM.

This game is a joke the whole damn thing and the GM hat on the rock is proof of it