Re: Hybrid Theory
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 01:27:17AM +1100, Clinton Mead wrote:
> Here, A wins, even though a superminority of people prefer the status quo.
> In my opinion, supermajority requirements are set to make sure major
> changes need very popular support, to ensure that major changes only
> happen when absolutely needed.
You're welcome to your opinion, of course.
I've claimed and continue to claim that supermajority requirements are
there to allow a superminority to *block* a change, and nothing else.
Granted, this is mildly counter intuitive, but after some thought it
makes sense. In traditional votes, it's obviously what happens when a
vote requires a supermajority, after all the only possibilities are to
let the change pass or to block it. In our votes, though, there are more
options: we can make that change, we can make some other change, we can
continue doing what we're currently doing, or we can discuss some more and
reconsider our options. Traditionally, working out which option is to be
voted on is done in advance using meeting rules: someone makes a proposal,
then it gets amended multiple times, and finally it gets voted on.
> Again in my opinion, if a superminority of voters support no change
> rather than major change, then no change should take place.
No. If all your superminorities are willing to accept a change, and the
majority of people want to make that change, it should be made.
It's not particularly meaningful to talk about "supporting" an option with
our voting scheme, by the way -- only to say which options you prefer
to which other options. It's quite reasonable to say that a vote "ABD"
indicates support for *both* A and B, in which case you have unanimous
support for all your options.
> People could say that the "40 BAD" voters should of voted "40 BDA". But
> this means they would of had to vote insincerely.
No, it doesn't. It means they shouldn't be exercising their supermajority
powers, since they actually find A to be an acceptable outcome. If
they wish to insincerely claim that they find A unacceptable in order
to strategically assist their preferred option, well, that's kind of
petty, really.
You can reread the, what, Y2k -vote archives for the discussion of this
same issue.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``Australian Linux Lovefest Heads West''
-- linux.conf.au, Perth W.A., 22nd-25th January 2003
Reply to: