Tank dps harrasment

[Shurrikhan]

As someone mentioned before wouldn't it fall under the majority of the voting participants.

If it takes only a majority, not unanimous vote, it cannot require a majority decision by the party, because you automatically deny the vote of whomever you target.

It may seem fair enough among 4 complete and non-partisan strangers, but have even one attached person apart from the victim of the vote, and it quickly would feel rigged, or as Zojha said, where first to shoot wins.

[Awha]

If it takes only a majority, not unanimous vote, it cannot require a majority decision by the party, because you automatically deny the vote of whomever you target.

It may seem fair enough among 4 complete and non-partisan strangers, but have even one attached person apart from the victim of the vote, and it quickly would feel rigged, or as Zojha said, where first to shoot wins.

Within the system we have one person is not considered, so at this point I think we are arguing semantics since being as one persons vote is not considered so between the remaining three the majority is needed for a vote to pass. It is not a perfect system, but nevertheless a majority is still needed for the vote to pass since the person the vote is against does not count towards the equation. They can feel slighted, but does not change the fact that among their remaining three members of the group if the vote passes it means that outside your vote the majority were not pleased with whatever action that lead to the vote in the first place.

I understand that I should not have said that the choice is based off the party as a whole, but that is why I switched over to majority of the voting participants. Since one person is taken out of the vote. So it comes down to the persons peers to make a choice for the collective.