<- Back
Comments (9)
- jp57This is interesting, though I'd point out that "consensus" actually means something different than a simple majority agreement. It means "broad agreement". Almost nobody would consider a 51/49 vote split among a large group as consensus; and even 3/2 in a committee of five would be a stretch, especially if the two in the minority are united on an opposing alternative proposal.I'm not sure that invalidates the core of the post, though, since I think a different consensus criterion could be substituted without losing the substance of the game.
- noghaGreen Team Wins is a board game that is based on consensus. Players answer simple questions that don’t really have a correct answer. Eg. Pie or Cake. The answer with the majority wins. It’s a fun game to play with family or coworkers.https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/347805/green-team-wins
- dmurrayI don't get this part> Here, you asked R0, R2 and R3 to abstain from casting further votes in the first three columns, signified by black x.If I can ask them to do that, and rely on them to go along with what I ask - why not skip all the middle steps and ask them all to vote for red?
- gus_massaI still don't understand the idea, but two questions anyway:Why did R2 vote on the 6th column instead of the 1st one?Why not just pick the leftmost column that has tree votes as the winner?
- KilledByAPixelWhy not use ranked choice voting?
- Heer_J[dead]