On 31/01/14 14:02, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > P1: DT > UT > DL > UL > P2: DL > UL > DT > UT > P3: UT > UL > DL > DT > P4: UT > UL > DL > DT > Of course, in the alternative scenario with two consecutive ballots (one > on the init, followed by one on the coupling), it would not have been > possible to express this preference over the relative importance of the > two questions, so one could argue that this is a feature of the single > ballot with all options. Yes I think this is by design, and IMHO desirable. Imagine if the questions were uncoupled and decided in *reverse* order, someone might decide to compromise on their choice of init system, due to the result of the first decision making their original choice less palatable. I think that's what people are expressing in their vote. Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain steven@pyro.eu.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature