Re: Call for votes for the Condorcet/Clone proof SSD voting methods GR
On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 22:39:20 -0400, Neil Roeth <neil@debian.org> said:
> On Jun 11, Manoj Srivastava (srivasta@debian.org) wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 06:55:47 -0400, Neil Roeth <neil@debian.org>
>> said:
>>
>> > And Manoj agreed that the ballot is flawed, so apparently it's
>> > clear on a second reading. :-)
>>
>> Sure. Where we differ is in considering this to be a mountain or a
>> molehill.
> Yes. And whether it would be simpler to void the vote and redo it
> versus letting the current vote continue and hoping it does not make
> a difference.
> Most important to me at this point is that we actually resolve it
> one way or the other rather than have an endless debate. Are you
> going to void the vote or not?
I would much rather not void this vote unless it seems likely
that the flawed ballot would make a difference in the results. Thus,
if the Yes option wins with the required majority, I think we a re
agreed there is no impropriety.
So, I am going to let this vote proceed.
> I'll live with the decision and stop debating it either way, though
> obviously I will be happier if you redo this vote with a flawless
> ballot.
Noted.
manoj
--
Saturday night in Toledo Ohio, Is like being nowhere at all, All
through the day how the hours rush by, You sit in the park and you
watch the grass die. John Denver, "Saturday Night in Toledo Ohio"
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: