Re: Another proposal.
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 06:14:41PM +0100, Jochen Voss wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 04:53:32PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Supermajorities are there to ensure the project stays true to its
> > goals. If you aren't interested in those goals, you have the option of
> > either convincing all but a fringe minority that your goals are better,
> > or of starting your own project.
> And what about quorums?
*shrug* I don't care about quorums :)
We could trivially deal with quorums by saying: "The quorum is met
if Q ballots are received from distinct voters. If quorum is not met,
the default option wins." We already check that there's enough support
to bother considering anything by requiring seconds, we check that
it's popular by condorcet criteria, we check it's not objectionable by
supermajority requirements; the point of a quorum is to check that the
vote hasn't been done without anyone hearing about it...
Anthony Towns <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''