Bug#727708: Call for votes on init system resolution

[Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>]

On 7 February 2014 08:44, Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote:
> If Colin joins Ian, Andreas and Steve in voting DT and UT below FD,
> then T is dead.

It's really pretty terrible to actively use FD to try to block options
that aren't your favourite. Honestly, I would have expected the tech
ctte to be able to come to a consensus on a set of proposals
considered reasonable by all the members, and accept whatever a
majority decided. I'd certainly hope that tech ctte members won't
tactically change their vote to try to hack the process.

(The obvious counter is for the four members who prefer T to L to vote
all the L options below FD in the same way as Andi, Ian and Steve have
voted all the T options below FD)

(Longer term, it seems to me the vote system would be improved by only
allowing voters to cast a vote that ranks the proposed options between
themselves, or to vote for Further Discussion (with no ability to
express preferences amongst the proposals). Quorum would then be
satisfied by having Q votes ranking the options, and a vote would only
be blocked if there was 50% or more of voters voting for FD. A similar
idea to supermajority requirements could be achieved by allowing
proposals to be blocked by 1/N voters voting for FD where N > 2)

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>