Re: Call for votes for the Condorcet/Clone proof SSD voting methods GR
On Jun 11, Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 06:59:29AM -0400, Neil Roeth wrote:
> > Your comments in conjunction with the snippets from the Constitution that you
> > posted a couple of days ago lead to a reasonable and obvious interpretation.
> > Do you, or do you not think we should run the vote as you described there?
>
> I really don't care; getting overly bothered by process isn't the
> way to get things done.
In general, I agree, but I think there is a point beyond which the time wasted
by not following a process exceeds the time spent following the process.
> (you'll note how both Richard and Manoj, who were both around when
> the constitution's GR procedure was drafted, and have stayed active
> in the project since then, both managed to miss the "clear and obvious
> interpretation" of how to run a GR)
And Manoj agreed that the ballot is flawed, so apparently it's clear on a
second reading. :-)
--
Neil Roeth
Reply to: