[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: It isn't quite Condorcet's method.

On Mon, Jun 12, 2000 at 02:58:35PM -0700, Darren O. Benham wrote:
> In the end, it takes a lot to change our constitution and I fail to see what
> would be gained.

Elimination of ambuguity.

Recent events have persuaded me, however, that lots of people like their
ambiguity, even if it ultimately ends up hamstringing us.

I should point out that leaving this issue unresolved makes it possible for
people to raise a legitimate challenge to our voting procedure, since the
present description avails itself of multiple interpretations of the same
set of ballots.

In you capacity as Project Secretary I would think you would be acutely
sensitive to such issues.  I also do not think that the issue of the recent
GR can be tied to this technical point by any rational person.  In fact,
the guys from the election methods list have brought this up before, months
previously, and were soundly ignored (at least, no one replied publicly).
(Possibly because the subject matter may lie outside the expertise of many

G. Branden Robinson            |      "I came, I saw, she conquered."  The
Debian GNU/Linux               |      original Latin seems to have been
branden@ecn.purdue.edu         |      garbled.
roger.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ |      -- Robert Heinlein

Attachment: pgpkSFtwj8oqY.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: