[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#727708: call for votes on default Linux init system for jessie

On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 08:22:19PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:59:34AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 12:18:41PM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > > >>>>> "Bdale" == Bdale Garbee <bdale@gag.com> writes:
> > 
> > >     Bdale> Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:
> > >     >> FWIW I have always assumed that the casting vote is implicit in
> > >     >> the chair's ballot.  To require the chair to explicitly exercise
> > >     >> their casting vote, as opposed to the chair's preferences as
> > >     >> expressed on the ballot being applied automatically, opens up
> > >     >> another set of vote gaming strategies that we really shouldn't
> > >     >> get into.
> > 
> > >     Bdale> I would have assumed that, too, but since others did not
> > >     Bdale> share the assumption, it seemed prudent to be explicit about
> > >     Bdale> it.
> > 
> > > This assumption does not make sense to me in the following cases:
> > 
> > > * Chair ranks multiple options equilly
> > 
> > If the chair ranked them equally in his ballot, why should he express a
> > different preference when it comes to the casting vote?
> I think the vote should always result in something, and as such
> the person having the casting vote needs to pick one of the
> options that are left in the Schwartz set.  If there was no
> preference between them, a choise will still need to be made.
> I've actually been wondering about this issue myself the past few
> days, and this seems to me the only good reason why the casting
> vote should be a different vote than the earlier vote.

Somewhere buried in this huge thread I had a discussion with Anthony 
regarding it, and in my opinion there is another possible good reason:

Assume in Ian's previous combined ballot where voting was aborted the 
two remaining members would have voted, and both had voted DT > DL > FD.

The result would have been:

DT > FD (5:3)
DL > FD (8:0)
DT = DL (4:4)

One can argue that the the chairman should simply pick whatever he 
personally prefers.

My point here is that the chairman should IMHO at least consider the 
fact that there is one option that is acceptable for all members, while 
the other option is vehemently opposed by 3 TC members.

And choosing a generally acceptable option over his personal preference 
would be a good reason for voting different in the casting vote.[1]

> Kurt


[1] The chairman has no obligation to change his vote in such a case,
    but if he would there would be a good reason and not just random
    erratic behaviour.


       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Reply to: