THE FAQ POLL IS NOW OPEN

[Saari at aol.com]

Subject: THE FAQ POLL IS NOW OPEN
(by saari at aol.com)

Rob has asked me to manage the creation of a FAQ (Frequently
Asked Questions document) for the Election Methods list.  It is a
daunting task, especially considering the current "fluid" state of
affairs (a polite way of saying we disagree in a number of key
areas).

So I've come up with a scheme to accomplish the job.  It is a novel
"general-purpose non-hierarchical group decision system" which I
have developed over the past several years.  The complete set of
starting rules is contained here.  It is less than one page in total
length.

This "seed" contains a rough-cut but complete system for reaching
group decisions, aiming to eliminate all traces of hierarchy.  From
this point forward, essentially ALL decisions regarding the contents
of the FAQ and other related matters (including welcome
improvements to the rules) may now be made by the group in a
collective fashion.

All members of EM are welcome and invited to make proposals,
and to cast votes.  If you wish to participate at all, kindly read the
enclosed rules carefully.  Save this in a file, and print out a hard-
copy for quick reference.

This rule set is complete, but is also deliberately terse and austere.
In several follow-on mail messages I will explain what it all really
means, including some discussion as to the reasons for some
unusual choices, examples of use, helpful hints and pitfalls, etc.

The system has familiar elements but the entire incentive structure
is unusual.  Please read the rules carefully, then feel free to
experiment!  We learn by doing.  (If the initial rule set doesn't quite
make sense, the follow-on messages should clarify considerably.)

Thanks,
Mike Saari

P.S. I have 3 roles which I will try to keep distinctly separate.
As a member of EM, I will be making proposals (as may everybody
else), and will be voting on many or most posted proposals.

As FAQ secretary, my job is now essentially done!  All I intend to do
now is act as a faithful (if somewhat stupid) secretary, and will
endeavour to blindly obey all group decisions with little or no
independent thought.  I will occasionally post the latest incarnation
of the FAQ to the list.

As a developer of this decision-making method, I will post
occasional hints or suggestions to the members (based on previous
experience).  These will be advisory only.

--------------------------------------------------------------


SEED RULES FOR "NON-HIERARCHICAL GROUP DECISIONS"

1) Any EM member can call for a vote at any time, on any specified
(including changes to the contents of the FAQ and changes to
these rules).

2) From the posting point, there will be a period of 7 days in which
any member can vote on that proposal.   (Multiple proposals may be
concurrently pending.)

3) To create a poll, post a message to the EM list with
"CFV: The descriptive title for this proposal "
in the subject line.  (CFV means "Call For Votes".)

4) Voters should vote by sending a message directly to the
proposer, and/or optionally sending their vote to the EM list for
verification purposes.  Only those on the EM list at the time at which
the voting period ends may vote on that proposal.

5) Votes are collected by the person who made the proposal.  At the
end of the 7 days, the proposer posts a summary message to the
list, including:
-If passed, indicate so in the subject line.
-Indicate the ASSERT total, the OPPOSE total, and the 
ASSERT / OPPOSE ratio.
-Restate the complete text of the proposal.
-List the name and email address of all voting members, and the
votes that they cast, in the form below:

   ASSERT
   Adam Boone  (ab at cdefg.com)
   Hillary Issacs  (hi at jklmn.com)

   OPPOSE
   Oscar Peters  (qr at stuvw.com)

-For every ballot involving unusual circumstances, brief details
should be given.
-Optional summary of "Other" responses and reasons for
opposition.

6) A message to the proposer will only be counted as a vote if the
following are true:
-The first word of the subject line is ASSERT or OPPOSE (or any
other terms subsequently authorized by group decision).
-The rest of the subject line restates the descriptive title for the
proposal being voted.
-The proposer has NO AUTHORITY to "interpret" positive-sounding
or negative-sounding messages as votes.  No exceptions.

7) If the ASSERT votes exceed the OPPOSE votes by a 2:1
margin, then the proposal becomes a "group decision", officially
blessed and actionable..

8) [from the list-owner] Vote fraud may be punishable by termination
from this list and possible nullification of the voting results.  I will
verify that the represented voters are members of the list upon
request.

(end of seed rules)