Hi, Peter Samuelson: > > Do you mean, perhaps, that the Further Discussion option in a GR should > be weighted much more heavily than other options, so that it can beat > another option if only a few people rank it higher? I am not in favor > of that. > You can't give any one option more "weight" in a Condorcet election because each input vote is a ranking of options. You _could_ require the Condorcet winner to have a 2:1 (or 1.5:1 or …) supermajority over FD. IMHO, doing this would not be good for Debian, for reasons already stated. > Or perhaps you mean there should be an official platform where someone > can say, effectively, "Before deciding to do X, you should take into > account that I, someone directly involved in its implementation, will > not help because I'm not convinced X is a good idea. Also, this may > demotivate me from related work Y and Z." But, well, anybody can > already say that. > Exactly. That platform already exists, it's called "debian-vote" (or -devel or -project … take your pick). > Anyway... I don't really see people leaving because of a decision they > disagree with. > I assume that some do, but they're doing it quietly. If the systemd decision had gone the other way (i.e. pro Upstart), I would have done the same thing. -- -- Matthias Urlichs
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature