On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 05:11:12PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > > Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't repeat. To vote
> > > "no, no matter what" do not leave an option black but rank "None Of
> > > The Above" higher than the unacceptable choices.
> >
> > So what exactly is "open for interpretation"?
>
> Whether ----1 means what you (and I) say or not. Note it says "do not
> leave [...] black(sic) but rank", that is, it says "vote like this:
> 23451 instead of like this: ----1", which is IMO wrong.
In a futile attempt to shorten this thread:
1. We have a disparity between how the vote software operates and how the
constitution says it should operate. This can be determined because of
Raul's mistaken publishing of vote information and a by-hand count.
2. The outcome of this election has been counted by several people and
it is agreed by all that the outcome would not have changed.
3. The software needs to be fixed.
4. There is a group already working to reform our voting system for other
practical reasons. We should let them do what they're doing.
5. Once they're done, the software can be fixed.
6. The vote software should be packaged when this is all over with - in
fact people should examine the debvote package and report problems they
see in its operation. Now's the time to resolve this if it's gonna be
resolved, right?
Does anybody have a problem with this?
--
Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> Free software developer
<james> but, then I used an Atari, I was more likely to win the lottery in ten
countries simultaneously than get accelerated X
Attachment:
pgpGBQeVI67Mr.pgp
Description: PGP signature