On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 10:04:02PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 08:52:16PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > I argue that we do want neutrality. It's the same thing as arguing > > against supermajorities. > > What kind of neutrality do we want? The kind that makes it rewarding for voters to vote their consciences rather than calculating their ballots in some results-oriented fashion. > > As I interpret the paper, the point is that any truly unpopular > > proposition that is railroaded through will energize the opposition, and > > result in its prompt repeal. > > This becomes meaningless if the vote replaces the system which > allows prompt repeal with some other system. It is true that my proposed course of action presumes that Debian Developers in general are not absolutely without any foresight whatsoever. > Are you talking 50% of 2000 debian developers + 1? Or are you talking > 50% of the active voters + 1? I am only concerned with majorities or supermajorities with respect to the ballots cast. I think it's better to use quorum requriments to address issues of voter turnout, if we feel that is important. > > Why would they flip-flop between in extremes under our system, where we > > can have multiple options on the ballot, and rank-ordering by the voter? > > You're advocating that that be subject to change. So it's at worth > discussing the fundamentals of this kind of change. I don't think I quite understand what you're saying here. -- G. Branden Robinson | The best place to hide something is Debian GNU/Linux | in documentation. branden@debian.org | -- Ethan Benson http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgpKXgjkCiKlZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature