Re: public info

On Friday 2015-01-09 11:49 -0800, L. David Baron wrote:
> On Friday 2015-01-09 14:31 -0500, Brian Kardell wrote:
> > I'm sure that there would be hesitance (I think it's been officially said
> > no) to disclose anything about the voting experiements, but is there -any-
> > kind of info?  Like, what % of people who voted voted in experiments?  I'm
> > not sure how it was arranged - was it possible that someone voted in
> > experiments without voting in the real thing?  Is it possible to say
> > something that doesn't give it away or undermine but still says something
> > useful - like, the numeric order of "most votes to least votes" differed
> > from the same kind of preferential sort?
> One thing about the voting experiments that I just noticed:  the
> response email from WBS for the ranked-choice voting doesn't match
> what I actually filled out; it shows "Don't want" next to the
> candidate I ranked as #1, 1 next to the candidate I ranked as #2, 2
> next to the candidate I ranked as #3, etc., down to 6 next to the
> candidate I ranked as #7.  (I think; assuming I'm remembering what I
> did correctly.)

To clarify here:  I see the correct ballot online when I view it in
WBS; it's only the email response that I got (which also went to an
archived team-only list, I believe) that is wrong.


𝄞   L. David Baron                  𝄂
𝄢   Mozilla                   𝄂
             Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
             What I was walling in or walling out,
             And to whom I was like to give offense.
               - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)

Received on Friday, 9 January 2015 20:00:29 UTC