SR - First-round polling?

[Timothy A. McDaniel]

We should think about how to go about the first round of polling for a
tentative regional name.  I was thinking of a kind of nomination
phase, where anyone can mark any number of names, and the first round
reduces the list to five or so.

Have an introductory paragraph explaining the purpose, along these
lines: This is to start trying to select a tentative name for the area
instead of just "the possible southern principality of Ansteorra", and
to get it protected by registration in case it is needed for a
principality.  This is NOT part of any principality naming poll.  If
the area eventually forms a principality, there will have to be a
second, more formal polling (involving mailing ballots to paid SCA
members), and the principality name vote could choose an entirely
different name (although the tentative name would likely be the
front-runner).

Paragraph two: Everyone expects Ansteorrans to be honorable and not
"stuff the ballot box".  Each person should submit only one ballot.
Only people who are active in the current Southern Region of Ansteorra
or who want to be or expect to be within the principality should cast
ballots.

Paragraph three: Mark any number of names that you want.  They should
be names that you'd like to shout on a battlefield, or yelling after
"Vivat" in court.  The top vote-getters will be submitted for another
round of voting.  The committee expects to use the top five, but
reserves the right to add a couple more if the cut off is close, or
adjust it if several related names crowd unrelated names off the list.

Each name would be printed with a box next to it.  (Details: I suggest
each name in boldface, as "hanging paragraphs".  I've found tables
take up too much space, since each column is usually as wide as its
widest cell.)

There would be lines for write-in names.

Problems:

- Should you mark names that you "like", that you "wouldn't mind", or
  that you "want considered"?  That could make a big difference.

- Should it really be like this?  I'm very concerned about the
  judgment call if a block of related names proves popular and crowds
  other candidates off.

  An alternative would be the "Australian preference ballot" I've
  described before, but I'm not sure it's appropriate for 63
  candidates (but with computerization, it'd be no more difficult than
  with 5; milliseconds instead of microseconds).

  Or should it really be a pure nomination phase, listing the
  already-suggested names and inviting more, with the *second* round
  instead weeding it down to five or so?

Daniel de Lincolia
-- 
Tim McDaniel (home); Reply-To: tmcd at crl.com; 
if that fail, tmcd at austin.ibm.com is my work address.
============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.