2024 Election Game (Sign Up/Discussion/Rules)

[NewYorkExpress]

Just a *suggestion* (which should not be by any means misconstrued to be armchair-generalling or anything): Post Super Tuesday, you should make the states' delegates winner-take-all, or do something like, some proportion of the delegates are automatically given to the winner, while the rest are distributed proportional to the results (for instance, say 50% of the delegates automatically go to the winner of the primary, and the other 50% are distributed proportionally - then, say, if Cooper wins 60% in a state with 30 delegates, he'd first off immediately receive 50% of the 30 delegates - so 15 delegates - and then 60% of the remaining 50% of delegates - so another 9 delegates - to give him 24 delegates and give Harris/Kerry a total of 6). Because the way all the states are totally proportional, it's not having very much of an impact when Cooper loses three primaries in a row, since he's still all right in terms of delegate count, and when it is in fact proportional, there's not nearly as much of an impetus to win a state's primary when you realise that, really, it's a question of only a few delegates and not a lot of them. My advice personally would be to let Super Tuesday be mostly winner-take-all since that's the way it's been till now - with maybe a few a mixture of winner-take-all and proportional, as described above - but thereafter, start having the states be mostly a hybrid of winner-take-all and proportional, with a few of the most competitive states being complete winner-take-all (so there's a lot of pressure on Cooper/Harris/Kerry to extensively campaign, and to win in, those specific states - since there wouldn't be just a few delegates at stake, but all the state's thirty or forty or fifty or more delegates).

I think we've established that GoTfan does not want suggestions?

I think he's fine with them, as long as it's evident they're not too nagging or frequent, and provided it's mostly constructive criticism. If he has a problem with them, that's different,t but otherwise, I think it'd be a great idea for him to incorporate a hybrid system of winner-take-all and proportional in the primaries. If he doesn't want to do that - that's fine. But I think it's best if he considers this proposal, at least.

That's not the impression I was getting.

[NewYorkExpress]

Just a *suggestion* (which should not be by any means misconstrued to be armchair-generalling or anything): Post Super Tuesday, you should make the states' delegates winner-take-all, or do something like, some proportion of the delegates are automatically given to the winner, while the rest are distributed proportional to the results (for instance, say 50% of the delegates automatically go to the winner of the primary, and the other 50% are distributed proportionally - then, say, if Cooper wins 60% in a state with 30 delegates, he'd first off immediately receive 50% of the 30 delegates - so 15 delegates - and then 60% of the remaining 50% of delegates - so another 9 delegates - to give him 24 delegates and give Harris/Kerry a total of 6). Because the way all the states are totally proportional, it's not having very much of an impact when Cooper loses three primaries in a row, since he's still all right in terms of delegate count, and when it is in fact proportional, there's not nearly as much of an impetus to win a state's primary when you realise that, really, it's a question of only a few delegates and not a lot of them. My advice personally would be to let Super Tuesday be mostly winner-take-all since that's the way it's been till now - with maybe a few a mixture of winner-take-all and proportional, as described above - but thereafter, start having the states be mostly a hybrid of winner-take-all and proportional, with a few of the most competitive states being complete winner-take-all (so there's a lot of pressure on Cooper/Harris/Kerry to extensively campaign, and to win in, those specific states - since there wouldn't be just a few delegates at stake, but all the state's thirty or forty or fifty or more delegates).

I think we've established that GoTfan does not want suggestions?

I think he's fine with them, as long as it's evident they're not too nagging or frequent, and provided it's mostly constructive criticism. If he has a problem with them, that's different,t but otherwise, I think it'd be a great idea for him to incorporate a hybrid system of winner-take-all and proportional in the primaries. If he doesn't want to do that - that's fine. But I think it's best if he considers this proposal, at least.

That's not the impression I was getting.

From me (as in, I sounded bossy and negative and should reword my post), or from him (as in, he doesn't want any suggestions at all, period)? Or both?

From him. He has his own style and he'd prefer not to have to deal with our suggestions, especially since he's played several games before and generally has a good idea of what to do.