 |
 |
I hate Lickert scales. On 13-04-01 12:43, Rosalyn Metz wrote: > well those three points become useful in the event of a tie. maybe i see > that its a tie, and change my mind, remove the 1 point from austin and give > it to raleigh. now raleigh has 2 more points than austin and you've > managed to put raleigh over the top. > > not that i've ever done that before........ > > > On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Ross Singer <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> PATCHES WELCOME. >> >> -Ross. >> >> On Apr 1, 2013, at 12:01 PM, "David J. Fiander" <[log in to unmask]> >> wrote: >> >>> So, I just voted for the Code4Lib 2014 location. There are two possible >>> venues, and I was given three points to apportion however I wish. >>> >>> While having multiple votes, to spread around at will, makes a lot of >>> sense, shouldn't the number of votes each elector is granted be limited >>> to max(3, count(options)-1)? That is, when voting for a binary, I get >>> one vote, when voting on a choice of three items, I get two votes, and >>> for anything more than three choices, I get three votes? >>> >>> I mean, realistically, one could give one vote to Austin and two votes >>> to Raleigh, but why bother? >>