Re: RFD: informal proposal
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 04:58:27AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 01:19:21PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 03:56:45AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > If you have:
> > > A - remove non-free (2:1 supermajority required, say)
> > > B - handwave about the issue, don't really do anything
> > > D - further discussion
> > > you might get results something like:
> > > 60 A B D
> > > 30 B A D
> > > 10 D B A
> > > with the groups being {A} and {B,D}. B defeats D by 90:10, so next we
> > > work with {A,B} scaling A down, ending up with B defeats A 40:30, in
> > > spite of a majority of developers wanting to remove non-free entirely.
[snip]
> The issues are utterly separate. Just because people mildly prefer one
> direction over another doesn't mean they're actually unhappy with that
> other direction.
I've been trying to understand this. Are you concluding this lack of
unhappiness because there are 90 preferences of A over D? D is just
"further discussion", while B sounds much more like a definite "No,
don't remove non-free" vote to me. I don't see how you infer
supermajority support for A, from a supermajority support for "A or B".
Richard Braakman
Reply to: