Without any need to try and interpret the votes between two BURs, a far simpler and clearcut solution would be to redo the votes but have the BURs one at a time. If the BUR fails to pass, then the name is taken off the list of candidates. You can either put the more popular choice first or you can put the less popular choice first. This will ideally force users who want to change the name to put a majority vote behind one of these name change BURs in a clearcut manner, especially if their choice name gets cut from the running.
I don't like that idea because it creates an elimination style situation where whoever goes last has the advantage. If the votes of these proposed BURs look anything like the current ones, then whoever goes first has absolutely no chance of passing. No one's going to vote counter to their wishes on the first BUR, because they have nothing to lose if they're against it, and everything to lose if they support it.
This virtually guarantees the first BUR's failure, and now for whoever was unlucky enough to support the first option it becomes, "Which term do I hate less?" You're just asking for people to vote out of spite at that point. And if you think our userbase isn't spiteful and petty, you should see how shockingly often grown adults get banned for fighting over the rights to reupload art they didn't even make.
The only "fair" way to do this is a three choice poll, with the results hidden until polling is concluded so that hopefully people will actually vote for what they support and not be influenced by the pre-finalized results.
What I suspect will happen though is that evazion will make an executive decision just to end this ridiculous squabbling.
I think it's backwards to change the tag name if the majority voted negative for both options. Interpreting votes as "pro change" or "anti change" is really irrelevant since neither change is supported by the majority of voters.
I think it's backwards to change the tag name if the majority voted negative for both options. Interpreting votes as "pro change" or "anti change" is really irrelevant since neither change is supported by the majority of voters.
That’s how it works when you have at least 3 options. The minimum amount of votes needed to win is anything greater than the reciprocal of the number of options, not necessarily a majority of the votes. For a 3-way vote, if two options each get 32% of the votes, then the remaining option will win with only 36% of the votes, meaning the majority (64%) will be opposed to the winner.
Blank_User said: For a 3-way vote, if two options each get 32% of the votes, then the remaining option will win with only 36% of the votes, meaning the majority (64%) will be opposed to the winner.
Only if the voting rules say that the third option wins in that case. There are also voting systems where all three would fail, or there would be a run-off, or where voters are asked to rank the options in order of preference and that is used to determine the winner.
We also don't have a 3-way vote. We have 2 separate yes/no votes. The only thing that can be determined from the voting is that neither rename has majority support standing alone, because that is the only thing that is being polled.
Only if the voting rules say that the third option wins in that case. There are also voting systems where all three would fail, or there would be a run-off, or where voters are asked to rank the options in order of preference and that is used to determine the winner.
We also don't have a 3-way vote. We have 2 separate yes/no votes. The only thing that can be determined from the voting is that neither rename has majority support standing alone, because that is the only thing that is being polled.
That’s the problem. Yes, there are two BURs (they’re not actually binary: there’s still the meh option and not voting at all), but there are only three outcomes in the end: change it to trap, change it to femboy, or keep it as otoko no ko. That means we need a way to convert the votes from those two BURs (there are 15 possible vote combinations if you vote on at least one BUR) into votes for those three options, and that’s where we’re currently stumbling right now.
Hey, how about you read back so you can see that someone has already brought up this point up for discussion regarding the tag's name change? You could avoid bumping the topic while adding no additional conversational value when people are watching this topic expecting replies for futher discussion.
My only contribution is that I don't like "femboy" as a tag because not all traps are boyish/youthful even if they are feminine.
SignedName said:
I think it's backwards to change the tag name if the majority voted negative for both options. Interpreting votes as "pro change" or "anti change" is really irrelevant since neither change is supported by the majority of voters.
zetsubousensei is only trying to rectify the lack of a vote when the tag was originally changed, as opposed to actively seeking a change, though the userbase is likely different now than it was then.
Since this only has a few days left I want to say that whatever the outcome of this thread is forum #349350 (which has already lapsed) should be updated to reflect the name. It's ridiculous to have reverse trap if the sister tag isn't trap.
Well, we had a month to discuss this, and we ended up with nearly 4x people voting in favor of one or the other vs voting against, so there's not much else for me to do. Let the tarring and feathering commence.
