On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 01:10:51PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 04:04:05PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > Does Branden's pass the supermajority clause? If not, it presumably > > wouldn't if reasked anyway, and it fails. > If it does, and is reasked, what's to stop a group of 6 people[1] from > proposing an "amendment" that guts the original proposal down to nothing ^^^^^^^^^^^ What are the scare quotes for? Did we not already have this discussion? > but uncontroversial cosmetic alterations? Absolutely nothing. The question isn't how controversial the amendment is, though, it's whether people prefer the amendment with just the cosmetic alterations to the original proposal. > The only real way out of this, it seems, is to advocate insincere > voting. ("Please rank Mr. A's editorial-only amendments below 'further > discussion' even if you like them, because the whole purpose of this > ballot is to decide whether we're accepting or rejecting *substantive* > amendments to the Social Contract".) No, that's completely wrong. If you have the options: [a] Remove non-free clause, editorial changes [b] Don't change the social contract, support non-free more! [c] Further Discussion Then the winner is elected by checking: Does a defeats c by more than 3:1? Does b defeat c? If one or both of these don't happen, the winner is obvious (if a fails, but b doesn't; it's b; if b fails but a doesn't, it's a; if both do, it's c) Does a defeat b? The only reason to vote insincerely is if you suspect that the outcome will be: B defeats A A defeats C B defeats C by N+K:N and you can convince at least K people to swap their preferences for B and C, and that given the choice between your proposal and the alternative, most people prefer the alternative. And I know we've already had this discussion. Are you going to be spreading FUD about every resolution that passes that you don't like? 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 DMCA (the Digital Agenda Amendments) Under Review! -- http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/copyright/digitalagenda
Attachment:
pgpYmxUZmumMM.pgp
Description: PGP signature