Re: Supermajority requirements and historical context [Was, Re: First call for votes for the Lenny release GR]
----- "Steve Langasek" <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> Oh gee, so the US is using Condorcet now?
You know that was not the point of my last message. Condorcet is orthogonal to the issue. A condorcet vote is just a full run off of options against one and other conducted via a ranking. The presence of "further discussion" effectively provides a "we should do this, we should not do this" vote for each choice. The question is "what is the 3:1 majority against?" If the majority is between "further discussion" and the 3:1 controlled result then I can see how it is the same as a "do this, don't do this" vote. If it is between the next closest runner up, then it seems poorly defined.
--
Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
ean@brainfood.com - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315
Reply to: