Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions
Ben Finney <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Don Armstrong <email@example.com> writes:
>> You should not be proposing or seconding an option that you don't
>> plan on ranking first.
> This seems quite wrong. Why should one not carefully and precisely
> phrase and propose an option that one does *not* agree with, in order to
> get it voted on?
Why vote on something no one actually wants? It just makes the ballot
more complex and has the potential to add confusion and wording problems
for no gain.
If it's a viable option, it will get enough seconds in its own right. If
it doesn't, it's so unpopular that there's no point in voting on it.
The only case where I could see it making sense to second options one
personally doesn't support is if one believes for some reason that there
is a huge disconnect between the people reading debian-vote and seconding
proposals and the project as a whole, so huge that an option that would
win in the larger vote doesn't have enough advocates reading debian-vote
to get sufficient seconds. This seems unlikely to me.
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>