[conlang_learners] Now or in September?

[Padraic Brown]

--- On Mon, 7/13/09, Jim Henry <jimhenry1973 at gmail.com> wrote:

> >> I don't see why not, but don't know what the
> others think.
> >
> > Some people may not want a public vote (for whatever
> reason). I think that a public vote *could* sway the more
> ambivalent voters to go along with the crowd -- if enough
> people (not a majority) are in favour of language X and
> their votes are on public view, other people might simply
> say "well, looks like language X is going to win anyway, and
> even though I'd rather have language Y, I'll go with
> language X just because 'every one else' is."
> 
> That's a good reason.  Another good reason, probably
> also sufficient
> by itself, is that several of us have conlangs of our own
> under
> consideration, whether nominated by ourselves or someone
> else.  Having
> one's conlang fail to be selected when "competing" with so
> many other
> conlangs as excellent and widely admired as some of the
> higher-profile
> conlangs on the shortlist is not likely to hurt one's
> feelings
> particularly; but knowing exactly who didn't vote for one's
> conlang,
> and how low the ones who did vote for it ranked it relative
> to other
> conlangs.... I'd rather not know that.

Another good reason. Me, I don't really care who (or even if anyone) chooses one of my languages. I don't see this as a competition. So, no hurt feelings if they aren't chosen!

> > Just pick someone who is willing to accept the votes,
> reply to the voters to let them know that their vote has
> been received, count the votes and let the group know the
> results.
> 
> I'd say at least two people, to count independently and
> report to each
> other their detailed counts and (once they have agreement
> on that) to
> the group at large the final results.

Sounds good.

> > I'd be willing to do that. If there's any question of
> "quis custodiet", then perhaps all votes should be CCed to
> Jim or some other person who can serve as a second counter.
> 
> I don't think either Padraic or me should be the vote
> counters,
> because Padraic nominated some of his own conlangs, and
> because
> someone (don't recall who) nominated gjâ-zym-byn.

Just to clarify: as I said one time before, I didn't "nominate" my own languages for consideration. I made their existence known to the community for consideration, because I have no idea who among this group of people even knows these languages exist. I don't enter Conlang, and understand that this project evolved from a discussion there. I wouldn't expect many people there to be aware of them.

To me, a nomination involves the promotion of a favourite and, by extension, a vote for same. If I were to nominate a language, I would choose something other than and probably more interesting than either of my own languages! Perhaps Teonaht or Maggel.

> The people who are on this mailing list and have a conlang
> of their
> own on the shortlist, whether nominated by themselves or
> someone else,
> are Larry, Padraic, Arthaey, Roger, Olivier, Ashucky,
> Dayle, and me.
> That leaves 40+ other people who could count
> votes.   Do any of y'all
> volunteer?
> 
> If you're thinking of volunteering, take a look at the
> Wikipedia page
> on "Instant-runoff voting",
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
> 
> and ask here if you have any questions about how it works
> or how we'll
> implement it.
> 
> Maybe to test the system we should first give the
> volunteers a small
> set of fake ballots with fake conlang names (Foolang,
> Barlang, Quxlang
> etc.) and make sure they both come up with the same
> results...?
> 
> The ballots should look something like this:
> 
> ballot #1:
> Foolang
> Barlang
> Quxlang
> 
> where voter #1 would most like to learn Foolang, then
> Barlang and
> Quxlang in that order, and doesn't particularly want to
> learn any of
> the other nominated conlangs;
> 
> ballot #2:
> Barlang
> Foolang
> Bazlang
> Quxlang
> 
> where voter #2 most wants to learn Barlang, then Foolang,
> etc., in
> decreasing order of preference.
> 
> That is, when voting you should list all the nominated
> conlangs that
> you would have any interest at all in learning, in order
> from most to
> least preferred.  If you don't want to learn a
> particular conlang at
> all, leave it off your list.
> 
> The vote-counters can start by going through and
> eliminating from a
> copy of the ballots all the conlangs that aren't in first
> place on
> anybody's list; then eliminate the conlang(s) that appear
> in first
> place on the fewest people's lists, and so on...
> 
> If that seems unwieldy, maybe it's a good argument for
> doing a
> two-round vote, to pick a shorter shortlist; with the
> first-round vote
> being done with some simpler method than instant-runoff
> voting, e.g.
> simply list the conlangs you would like to learn, and the
> five that
> appear on the most people's lists become the shorter
> shortlist.  (It
> could be six or more if there is a tie for fifth place, as
> seems not
> unlikely with such a small population of potential
> nominees.)
> Brett's idea of giving everyone a month or so to study the
> shorter
> list of conlangs in greater depth is also a good reason for
> this
> procedure.
> 
> Does anyone object to the above proposed voting structure?

Keep it simple! Discuss and decide on a group the five most likely over the next six weeks or so. That will leave plenty of time for exams, potential conlang creators to review and improve their documentation in advance of the vote. On the chosen day -- I would propose 17 September, being the feast day of St. Hildegard of Bingen -- send a message to the group that says something to the effect of:

"Conlang Learners Official Ballot: 
My choice for conlang to be learned is:______________

You may choose from the list of five: Foolang, Gumlang, Hoaxlang, Monlang and Quxlang."

If you like the idea of a short questionnaire / rationale, that should go under the ballot. Lastly, ensure that all ballots are properly forwarded:

"PLEASE forward your completed ballot to the following: "

Padraic

> -- 
> Jim Henry
> http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/
> _______________________________________________
> conlang_learners mailing list
> conlang_learners at conlang.org
> http://lists.conlang.org/listinfo.cgi/conlang_learners-conlang.org
>