Time to Tame the Trolls

[elsol]

Fixing voting is not really possible. Someone that has it out for you will troll you, end of story.

No anonymous voting? Hey... here's my 'troll-id'

Give a reason? Sure, here's the reason that they'll give.

[Because this story sucks!]

[Because you're a shithead with delusions of talent!]

This post basically guaranteed another troll past, because it clearly annoys you.

Let's be honest for a second... does anybody REALLY deserve a 5? How many of your stories are REALLY 5's in your mind? I can would say 1 out of 21 of mine is a five... the rest are in the 3 or 3.5 area, maybe someday I'll really write a five.

And that's false not humility... I know I'm good, but I'm not as good as I know I can be so the trolls are just a ego-check for me, so that I don't let the kindness of others go to my head.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[Guest]

Fixing voting is not really possible. Someone that has it out for you will troll you, end of story.

No anonymous voting? Hey... here's my 'troll-id'

Give a reason? Sure, here's the reason that they'll give.

[Because this story sucks!]

[Because you're a shithead with delusions of talent!]

This post basically guaranteed another troll past, because it clearly annoys you.

Let's be honest for a second... does anybody REALLY deserve a 5? How many of your stories are REALLY 5's in your mind? I can would say 1 out of 21 of mine is a five... the rest are in the 3 or 3.5 area, maybe someday I'll really write a five.

And that's false not humility... I know I'm good, but I'm not as good as I know I can be so the trolls are just a ego-check for me, so that I don't let the kindness of others go to my head.

Sincerely,
ElSol

*applauds*

Thank you. That's what I tried to say earlier in the thread.

 

[cantdog]

If you're using your literotica catalogue to further your commercial resume', I should think those looking at it would be receptive to the idea that this is free anonymous voting, and the ratings ought be secondary to the quality of the story they're looking for.

Joe has a good point here. Once the first ten votes are in, everyone drops off their initial high mark, because they are in the swim, with the hoi polloi.

Most editors will read the story and judge by that, anyway. A decent overall rating here would go to demonstrating an ability to capture a readership base. Don't you think?

 

[English Lady]

*applauding along with Lou* well said Elsol

 

[Awful Arthur]

Fixing voting is not really possible. Someone that has it out for you will troll you, end of story.

No anonymous voting? Hey... here's my 'troll-id'

Give a reason? Sure, here's the reason that they'll give.

[Because this story sucks!]

[Because you're a shithead with delusions of talent!]

This post basically guaranteed another troll past, because it clearly annoys you.

Let's be honest for a second... does anybody REALLY deserve a 5? How many of your stories are REALLY 5's in your mind? I can would say 1 out of 21 of mine is a five... the rest are in the 3 or 3.5 area, maybe someday I'll really write a five.

And that's false not humility... I know I'm good, but I'm not as good as I know I can be so the trolls are just a ego-check for me, so that I don't let the kindness of others go to my head.

Sincerely,
ElSol

I agree.

However...

Yes, some people do bomb for meanness. And some of it originates right here on the AH.

The problem is the little red H.

Everybody wants them. They have come to symbolize success. And there is nothing wrong with that.

So, to get a little red H your work has to have a 4.5 average vote. Sounds fair enough and the intent was, I’m quite sure, just.

The problem comes in with the disproportionate damage done by a 1, 2, or 3 vote.

It takes seven 5 votes to offset a 1 back to an average of 4.5.
It takes five 5 votes to offset a 2 back to an average of 4.5.
It takes three 5 votes to offset a 3 back to an average of 4.5.

In categories and poems that receive few votes, even one malicious 3 can be devastating.

Now, what if the criteria for an H was 3 instead of 4.5.

One 5 would offset one 1. One 4 would offset one 2.
Bombing, high or low, would be of much less consequence. Almost insignificant. And the goal would be to have an "average" story. Good enough, in my opinion, to be considered "hot."

Too, liberal? Okay make the criteria for an H, 3.5. Two 5 votes would more than offset one 1 but the damage would not be overwhelming and could be reasonably offset by normal votes.

Past votes? Freeze them as is or work out some simple equitable formula. When you take into account the 1s and 2s that have been removed and the 5s that have been voted gratuitously, it probably evens out.

AA

 

[Evil Alpaca]

I agree.

However...

Yes, some people do bomb for meanness. And some of it originates right here on the AH.

The problem is the little red H.

Everybody wants them. They have come to symbolize success. And there is nothing wrong with that.

So, to get a little red H your work has to have a 4.5 average vote. Sounds fair enough and the intent was, I’m quite sure, just.

The problem comes in with the disproportionate damage done by a 1, 2, or 3 vote.

It takes seven 5 votes to offset a 1 back to an average of 4.5.
It takes five 5 votes to offset a 2 back to an average of 4.5.
It takes three 5 votes to offset a 3 back to an average of 4.5.

In categories and poems that receive few votes, even one malicious 3 can be devastating.

Now, what if the criteria for an H was 3 instead of 4.5.

One 5 would offset one 1. One 4 would offset one 2.
Bombing, high or low, would be of much less consequence. Almost insignificant. And the goal would be to have an "average" story. Good enough, in my opinion, to be considered "hot."

Too, liberal? Okay make the criteria for an H, 3.5. Two 5 votes would more than offset one 1 but the damage would not be overwhelming and could be reasonably offset by normal votes.

Past votes? Freeze them as is or work out some simple equitable formula. When you take into account the 1s and 2s that have been removed and the 5s that have been voted gratuitously, it probably evens out.

AA

Howdy Arthur! Long time, no see.

My problem with your suggestion, which is mostly superficial on MY part, is that I think it makes H's too easy to achieve, so for those people (such as shallow little me), it kind of loses its meaning. I actually often use the H's when I check the lists to see which stories to read first, as soon as I'm done reading my preferred categories.
In principle, you're absolutely right about 1's being too difficult to overcome to retain status, but I'm not sure I like the idea of "lowering the H standards" to avoid it. I realize some people might say that we should write just because we love doing it, but then why have the voting at all?

(P.s. Glad to see you again.)

 

[tolyk]

but then why have the voting at all?

For the contests.

 

[Evil Alpaca]

For the contests.

But wouldn't that leave us the same problems but for a smaller set of stories which are heavily trollified?

(I invented a word!)

 

[Awful Arthur]

Howdy Arthur! Long time, no see.

My problem with your suggestion, which is mostly superficial on MY part, is that I think it makes H's too easy to achieve, so for those people (such as shallow little me), it kind of loses its meaning. I actually often use the H's when I check the lists to see which stories to read first, as soon as I'm done reading my preferred categories.
In principle, you're absolutely right about 1's being too difficult to overcome to retain status, but I'm not sure I like the idea of "lowering the H standards" to avoid it. I realize some people might say that we should write just because we love doing it, but then why have the voting at all?

(P.s. Glad to see you again.)

Good to see you too Llama.

The point I did a lousy job of making was that I think the "average" right now is close to a 4.5. With most of the 1s and 2s being erased and so many people voting 5s or else not voting because of the disproportionate penalty a 3 or lower carries, you probably have the "average story" getting an H right now. And I think that is okay. An "average story" on here is pretty hot.

I know that I am very, very reluctant to vote anything but a 5 because of the feeling that I could be wrong and I know how difficult a low vote is to overcome.

That is not the way voting should go, I know, but on the other hand I am not so certain of my opinions that I feel comfortable casting a 3 that offsets three other people who thought the story was a 5. It just throws too much weight to my one low vote that could be wrong.

Generally, if I don't think a story is good, I just don't vote and I know a lot of others do the same. I never vote a 3 anymore. In essence, my "average" vote is above 4.5.

I just think it would simplify everything if a true 3 average was a "Hot" story.

AA

 

[davidwatts]

Hello all.

A "one" vote is not a 1, it's a zero. I think there are some crummy stories on here, and maybe some of mine qualify. Nothing on here deserves a zero. Someone took the time to write something for nothing, they don't deserve a zero. A monkey can get a 25 on a multiple choice test. When they start charging to let people read, then that's something else altogether.

Leave the one option vote on there though, and have them swept out like they are usually done.

What I would like is a simple rundown of what the votes were, like this maybe:

20 votes

10- 5's
6- 4's
3- 3's
1- 1

score -4.20


This way you know more about the way the story is received. You know in the above case that 16 people thought the story was quite good, three were non-committal, and a troll visited you.


I also think that we authors sometimes think they are getting trolled when we are not. In the early voting, if you have a high score even a 4 drives you down farther than you think. Knowing the individual scores would help soothe us.

Opine with enthusiasm.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I think Davidwatts has good points about the effects of various votes, but I'm in favour of keeping the 1's. I suppose I tend to be field-selective; I look at a one not as "monkey could've done better" but "on the scale of things on this site, in the bottom 20%." From that perspective, I think it makes sense to have the 1 available - although admittedly, I vote a great many more 4's and 5's than anything else and I don't know if I've ever given a one. I understand the point of view that a 1 should be a ranking against all possible literary efforts; I just tend instead to look as it as a measure of that story in the scheme of Literotica.

Shanglan

 

[davidwatts]

I think Davidwatts has good points about the effects of various votes, but I'm in favour of keeping the 1's. I suppose I tend to be field-selective; I look at a one not as "monkey could've done better" but "on the scale of things on this site, in the bottom 20%." From that perspective, I think it makes sense to have the 1 available - although admittedly, I vote a great many more 4's and 5's than anything else and I don't know if I've ever given a one. I understand the point of view that a 1 should be a ranking against all possible literary efforts; I just tend instead to look as it as a measure of that story in the scheme of Literotica.

Shanglan

You look at it in terms of the quality of the writing, which is how it should be, but I would be surprised if these one's and two's aren't mostly products of the story subject itself.

"Kill all cheating wives!" and "Homos suck and so do you" comments attached to one votes aren't based on the quality of the work, but of the voter's feelings. Why they read about things that upset them is another thing altogether. The votes still count the same, however.

Where it gets confusing is this; if you read a story and think it's mediocre and give it a three, and then you read one that's so full of errors it's unreadable and bail out without voting, you actually punish the readable one in comparison.

It all seems to work itself out in the end anyway, but I still like the idea of a little grid with the individual votes available (numbers not identity) to the author. No real complaints from this corner, who has been most fortunate in terms of very generous voters and having been relatively troll free.

 

[BlackShanglan]

It all seems to work itself out in the end anyway, but I still like the idea of a little grid with the individual votes available (numbers not identity) to the author.

With you on that. That would be nice.

 

[mismused]

===================================================

I did that once, but no one listened. I even sent PM's to Laurel, and posted them. Nothing was changed. Also went the "prescribed" way of reporting routine. (BTW, not talking about my original "Did I catch someone" thread.)

QUOTE]

It did inspire a few to do a lovely challenge.

===================================================

[Thread hijack for amusement too good to pass up]Yeah, duels at dawn, brunch time, high noon, and supper time, not to mention tit fights, karate tournaments with posturing without end (like kids saying my brother can beat your brother
), and shouting matches kind of like pig calls (sorry, CD ).

Uh, better make that "challenges!"[/hijack ended]

mismused

 

[mismused]

Yes, some people do bomb for meanness. And some of it originates right here on the AH.

The problem is the little red H.

AA

=======================================================

I agree about the meanness, but I disagree that it's just about the "little red H."

As I said, I had plenty of time to do some score checking at very odd hours, as well as the regular hours. Oh, I was so proud that people agreed that I had good story telling ability, and it showed up quite often. Of my 22 submissions of chapters on my first story, I once had about 9 to 13 in the top 25 to 50. Little by little, they chopped them out.

Let me say this plainly: I'm a person who really does believe in some things, and naive and silly as it may be, I am appalled by some ot what was done. I didn't aspire to win anything, but I was very proud, as Imp most likely is, to have written something that was so well loved. Yes, loved. And that's what I want to say.

I had many e mails extolling the joy my stories brought to them, and I was so happy to have done that for them, as well as "do" something so good, in my estimation. It hurt the hell out of me that someone "deprived" not only me, but my readers who truly loved what I wrote, and some opened themselves up to tell me how they were affected, or how close to "real" life my stories were. It all became so personal to me, for myself, and for my readers.

Yep, I'm naive. And I'm a person with a lot of sentimentality, and I hated to see us, my readers and myself, get 1 bombed simply because the stories were too popular.

It's not the H, it's the preeminence, the public popularity, IMHO. That's what I detected from the bombs because they never dropped a one of my stories back then from that little red H. It was the top spots, as far as I could determine.

After the big to do, I just told myself that I would ignore the 1's. I have one of two on my latest story, but I haven't reported it. It didn't do any good back then, and I'm not about to go begging. Then again, we shouldn't have to. Take away the cash prizes, and make the H's when a story has many more than the 10 votes it now takes, and that may help, that and some more policing. I'm not going to say I should have all 5's, but I know darned good and well that only a moron who can't read would give me a 1 on any of my stories. That, or they just hate the category, and go into it anyway. Duh! Did I say moron?

Once again, good luck, IMPressive. You are a terrific writer, and I guess you're just too good, but please don't leave -- you're too well loved here by too many.

mismused

 

[elsol]

I think it would be interesting to see how people score stories...

5 --- I finished your story.
4 --- I finished your story, but I had to work at it by willfully ignoring bad writing.

3, 2, 1 -- Sorry... I don't have time to read anything that I THINK I MIGHT NOT like.

I bail on the first paragraph of 95% of stories I open.

How I measure MYSELF

5 -- My best story
4 -- My second and third best story
3 -- The good stuff that i've written
2 -- The stuff I've written that I can't read because I can see the errors even when other people LOVE the stories
1 -- I don't write CRAP.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[BlackShanglan]

I think it would be interesting to see how people score stories...

5 --- I finished your story.
4 --- I finished your story, but I had to work at it by willfully ignoring bad writing.

3, 2, 1 -- Sorry... I don't have time to read anything that I THINK I MIGHT NOT like.

I bail on the first paragraph of 95% of stories I open.

That was interesting. I don't vote things that I don't finish, and I do know that that inflates scores - but I'm not about to read all the way through something when the first paragraph convinces me that it will be awful. On the other hand, I don't feel comfortable voting it a 1 or 2 because of the first paragraph, however big a sin it is - and it's the ultimate one, really - for a writer to turn off the reader in the first few words.

My voting tends to go more like:

5: Very well written. The content may or may not be what I like, but the story has enough redeeming qualities that I think it in the top 20% of the site and/or I would recommned it to a friend and/or it shows great promise. I tend to be a little more generous with scores with someone who is on his or her first story or so. The story can still have flaws; once or twice I've even 5'd a story with a flaw or so that made my wince, because the rest of the story was so good that it dragged me back.

4: Decent, workmanly stuff that seems to have had attention paid to it, but not passionately inspiring, or possibly has a few major issues that knock it out of the top 20% for me. It might be that the characterization is thin, or that the plot is little well-worn, or that the language is off fairly frequently, or sometimes that it's wonky in audience appeal - it's written, for example, specifically for one lover, and for that reason has difficulty communicating to a broader audience despite being quite good for its original target. I still enjoy 4's, but generally finish feeling that something was missing from the experience.

3: About as low as I am willing to read all the way through. I don't vote these often and they are usually short. This is a story that is either very trite, or poorly constructed, or severely ungrammatical (to the point of obscuring meaning), or in some other way a work with substantial barriers to reader interest.

2, 1: I've hardly ever used these because I have such trouble getting through a story that bad. If it's very short I might vote it. A 2 I think a story where at least a little effort has been made and there is some germ of a decent idea if perhaps very badly executed. A 1 is a story in the bottom 20% for the site - one that seems careless, thoroughly badly written, and not worth clambering over the obstacles the author presents to the reader.

 

[Dar~]

1. I have never read a story this bad.
2. I couldn't have a continuous read through b/c I had to keep going back to read it again b/c of errors.
3. Some decent effort was put forth. You could tell the author tried but it was so bland. Too many repeating phrases, reduntant.
4. The author tried, the plot was interesting, but it didn't reach my heart. (or other parts) I use fours for things that have more gramatical errors than anything else.
5. Turned me on. Caught me up in the plot. I would think about it later and want to announce to the board how good I thought it was.

 

[impressive]

I'm more in Shang's camp on how I vote (i.e., a 5 is in the top 20% of the stories I've read on Lit).

I usually always finish the first page -- and, even if it's a 7-page story, if the first 3,800 words are THAT bad, I have no qualms about voting low without finishing it. It is HIGHLY unlikely that things will improve THAT much in subsequent pages, especially if the spelling/grammar/punctuation are horrendous. I also use the "REPORT PROBLEMS WITH THIS STORY" link to point it out to the powers-that-be. (Wish I knew what, if anything, they do about those reports.)

Unlike Shang, I am not more lenient with new authors. Either the story (or poem) is in my top 20% (or 40% or 60%) or it's not.

 

[Op_Cit]

OK, I haven't read each and every reply to this thread so excuse any redundancy.

1. The vote system as it stands is silly and useless.
2. Making voting NON-anonymous would be a big step in the right direction.
3. My sure fire answer:

Make voting non-anonymous and allow the reader to select a list of voters whose opinion they respect. Then when stories lists are presented to the reader a score can be shown next to the story that is the average score of the voters which that particular reader respects.

That way the reader can overtime develop a set of reviewers that provide them with a more accurate (kind of bayesian) ranking that is taylored to their own likes/dislikes. (And yes I am a software developer and I know this is not a difficult feature to provide.) In this manner too, the writer can identify those whose opinions they respect to see a more realistic appraisal of their work; or if they are the rose colored lens types, they can select a list of more positive reviewers.

Personally, I never vote: I could only score stories appropriately and in that vein I could never give a 5, and 2.5 would be my starting average ranking.

Many times I have been tempted to hand out a 5 or even a 1 just to adjust an inappropriate score I have found, but I restrain myself.

Anyway, the worst thing about this site is the scoring and the lack of detailed multicategory identifiers. As a reader I think I miss out on so very many potentially enjoyable, and perhaps really good stories.

So much for this useless opinion....

 

[BlackShanglan]

Make voting non-anonymous and allow the reader to select a list of voters whose opinion they respect. Then when stories lists are presented to the reader a score can be shown next to the story that is the average score of the voters which that particular reader respects.

That way the reader can overtime develop a set of reviewers that provide them with a more accurate (kind of bayesian) ranking that is taylored to their own likes/dislikes.

Or they can develop a list of five or six alternate ID's and make sure that everything they ever write is ranked a perfect "5."

I tend to think of the votes more as reader information than writer information. That is, as a writer, I already have a group of people whose opinions I trust. I consult with them about stories, often during editing or even drafting, and I learn from them everything I want to know about how the story works and what needs to change or improve. Getting a 1-5 vote from such people would not be of any real use to me; what helps is when Carson goes through a whole file red-highlighting the crap, blue-highlighting the good, and writing the occasional "Yoda!" in as a comment. I don't see votes as really giving authors any serious advice; they just tell us whether the mass of general readers liked it. There are many reasons why such people may or may not like a story.

On the other hand, I think that votes may have some use for readers. Sure, we don't all like the same things, but the odds are good that that which is ranked at an average of a 2.1 is something I don't need to waste my time with. (If the troll-sweeps are working, which they usually are.) I've sometimes used the top lists to look for decent stories in a category. The results are mixed for me, but then I accept that what I look for in a porn story is probably not what the bulk of readers look for. If the votes help people with tastes a bit more mainstream, good for them. But if we allowed authors to pick who gets to vote on their stories and make limited lists, everyone's score will be quite high, and all voters will be under some pressure because it will be more clear who voted what, leading either to nervous "gentle" voting or to hurt feelings. I'm in favor of not allowing anonymous logins to vote, but against anything that helps an author identify who voted what.

Interesting take on the "never vote a 5." I can understand that; one hesitates to call something perfect. However, I would suggest that a 5 might equally be seen as a broad category - something like an "A" in school. While one hesitates to give anything a 100% as an indication of perfection, one doesn't mind giving an A for truly good, powerful work. I'd argue that when there are only 5 options to choose from, it makes increasing sense to use the whole scale. But that's just me

Shanglan

 

[cloudy]

Or they can develop a list of five or six alternate ID's and make sure that everything they ever write is ranked a perfect "5."

I tend to think of the votes more as reader information than writer information. That is, as a writer, I already have a group of people whose opinions I trust. I consult with them about stories, often during editing or even drafting, and I learn from them everything I want to know about how the story works and what needs to change or improve. Getting a 1-5 vote from such people would not be of any real use to me; what helps is when Carson goes through a whole file red-highlighting the crap, blue-highlighting the good, and writing the occasional "Yoda!" in as a comment. I don't see votes as really giving authors any serious advice; they just tell us whether the mass of general readers liked it. There are many reasons why such people may or may not like a story.

On the other hand, I think that votes may have some use for readers. Sure, we don't all like the same things, but the odds are good that that which is ranked at an average of a 2.1 is something I don't need to waste my time with. (If the troll-sweeps are working, which they usually are.) I've sometimes used the top lists to look for decent stories in a category. The results are mixed for me, but then I accept that what I look for in a porn story is probably not what the bulk of readers look for. If the votes help people with tastes a bit more mainstream, good for them. But if we allowed authors to pick who gets to vote on their stories and make limited lists, everyone's score will be quite high, and all voters will be under some pressure because it will be more clear who voted what, leading either to nervous "gentle" voting or to hurt feelings. I'm in favor of not allowing anonymous logins to vote, but against anything that helps an author identify who voted what.

Interesting take on the "never vote a 5." I can understand that; one hesitates to call something perfect. However, I would suggest that a 5 might equally be seen as a broad category - something like an "A" in school. While one hesitates to give anything a 100% as an indication of perfection, one doesn't mind giving an A for truly good, powerful work. I'd argue that when there are only 5 options to choose from, it makes increasing sense to use the whole scale. But that's just me

Shanglan

I agree with you, Shanglan.

To me, never using the 5 because "nothing is perfect" is not only a little too judgemental, but also throwing out part of the scale that is allowed to be used. Like you, I see a 5 as an "A." There are high A's and low A's, but they're all still an A when the report card comes out.

 

[Op_Cit]

Or they can develop a list of five or six alternate ID's and make sure that everything they ever write is ranked a perfect "5."

Perhaps you misunderstand: the list of voters for which an average score is shown is only for the viewer.

That is, anybody can vote on any story in any way, you the viewer (as a reader or writer) can choose a list of voters from which to calculate and display a score. You could also show the average score from the pool of all voters.

My point is that scoring only has value for the person looking at the score and each person looking at the score is coming from a different context. As it stands, I find scoring is not very useful as either a reader or writer.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Perhaps you misunderstand: the list of voters for which an average score is shown is only for the viewer.

That is, anybody can vote on any story in any way, you the viewer (as a reader or writer) can choose a list of voters from which to calculate and display a score. You could also show the average score from the pool of all voters.

My point is that scoring only has value for the person looking at the score and each person looking at the score is coming from a different context. As it stands, I find scoring is not very useful as either a reader or writer.

Ah, thanks for the clarification. Yes, that makes a good deal more sense to me. Then again ... for the list of people whose opinions I really value, I just ask them. I like getting more detail than a 1-5.

Actually, one of the things I use as a reader is the favorites lists. When I find an author who seems to be in sync with me, I look for what else that author has read and thought good. I've found some good stories that way. I like that that option is there; it helps me locate stories more tailored to my specific tastes.

I've used another site where there is no voting at all, just favorites lists. On that site, one applies to make a list - there are many, but it's not something everyone automatically gets to do - and the listers post explanations of who they are, what they like in literature, what types of content they prefer, etc. That's very helpful, as I was able quickly to track down the four or five who were most likely to recommend stories I liked.

Shanglan

 

[cantdog]

Sadly, I think the votes ARE a reader service. Whatever quality it is which attracts the majority will be selected for, if the manipulations do not skew the votes.

But mismused is quite correct. Top lists foster manipulations. People undercut authors, and they undercut stories on the top lists. People also pump up certain stories and authors.

Shanglan's observation that the top lists are still a grab bag is very true. Some are trite, repetitive, laden with useless background, paced wrong, and even the sex is lousy, while others are gems.

I'm in favor of not allowing anonymous logins to vote, but against anything that helps an author identify who voted what.

Please! Let us never get away from anonymous voting, in that sense. I understood impressive to be asking that only the votes of the members would count, not asking to know the identities of all voters on a story. Other replies to this thread have said "a little grid," but I thought they meant

5 | 20
4 | 16
3 | 27
2 | 08
1 | 16

like that. What use such a grid may be I am completely in the dark about, but I didn't imagine they meant a grid like

5 | Black Shanglan
4 | cantdog
5 | neonlyte
1 | fartknocker_666

Me, I don't want that much detail. But if only members' votes count, the "policing" will need to be done on far fewer votes, and will be timelier. Also, in general, the pool of voters will be a more reliable pool of voters.

This thread is not here to call for every idea for fixing the voting, even if fixing the voting were possible, which at least half of us agree it is not. The thread was here to garner support for this one idea. Can we call a halt to the general discussion and call the question?

Will anyone agree to support impressive in this one idea? To add their voice to hers in support of it?

cantdog