Re: Constitution - formal proposal (v0.5)

[Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net>]

On Mon, 6 Apr 1998, Ian Jackson wrote:

> Dale Scheetz writes ("Re: Constitution - formal proposal (v0.5)"):
> ...
> > Not exactly. I think that it is clear that the quorum is defined for a
> > vote requirement of N:1 as NQ. 
> 
> I think this is far from clear.  Indeed, I thought that under close
> examination the quorum would be simply Q.  My most recent draft (0.6)
> makes this explicit.
> 
> >  My problem is that then the paragraph goes
> > on to say that, for the proposal to pass at least NQ votes must be cast
> > for the proposal. If the total number of voters is equal to NQ then the
> > vote must be 100% of the votes cast (not N:1), or you need more votes
> > (outside the quorum) to pass the proposal. This requires either a
> > different voting ratio, or a larger voting population (larger quorum), in
> > order to pass the proposal, which is not what I would expect given the
> > definition of these quantities.
> 
> I think this is a bug in your expectations.

Possibly ;-)

> 
> Is your complaint about the wording or the effect ?  If the wording, I
> think it might be helpful for you to suggest an alternative wording
> which you think has the same effect.  If the effect, I think it might
> be helpful for you to suggest an alternative effect with a couple of
> examples.
> 
The wording seems clear to me, but the effect is confusing. In effect, if
a quorum must vote in favor of a proposal for it to pass, and only a
quorum is present, this condition makes the voting requirement go from
N:1 to Q:0. That is, with only a quorum present, (a group defined to be
enough to decide by an N:1 vote) the requirement changes to unanimous!
This has the net effect of requiring that under these conditions a quorum
is not sufficient to obtain an N:1 vote. Some larger value is required
depending on how the vote goes. If the vote is N:1 then number of people
who must cast ballots is then ((N+1)/N)*Q, which for a 2:1 vote is an
increase of 50%, over Q. Thus in this case a quorum was unsufficient for a
deciding vote.

Is that clearer?

Thanks,

Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_-   Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide"  _-_-_-_-_-_-

aka   Dale Scheetz                   Phone:   1 (850) 656-9769
      Flexible Software              11000 McCrackin Road
      e-mail:  dwarf@polaris.net     Tallahassee, FL  32308

_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org