On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:51:51PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Stefano's DPL platform is actually quite clear on the subject:
<snip>
> After seeing the results of this choice, it will always be possible to
> change the procedure, especially if a later DPL is elected with a
> platform that goes more towards an equal access for all DDs.
I know you're very keen of this argument, but it has always been
unconvincing to me. It is not because DPL get elected on specific
platforms that they can assume the majority of people share *all* of
their content. It is generally *likely* that voters share most of the
content of the winner's platform, but there can still be controversial
points that are not appreciated by the majority of voters.
In fact, you can even imagine an election with only "bad" candidates, in
which voters vote following the discipline of "I choose the candidate I
dislike the least" more than that of "I choose the candidate I like the
most". In such an hypothetical election, the content of the platform is
pretty much useless to understand what the project wants.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, | . |. I've fans everywhere
ti resta John Fante -- V. Caposella .......| ..: |.......... -- C. Adams
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature