Re: Another proposal.
Raul Miller wrote:
> >That would be bad.
> >If you do it this way, there are circumstances where a vote against
> >an option may cause that option to win (because without that vote the
> >option wouldn't have met quorum).
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 02:21:05PM -0500, Buddha Buck wrote:
> I think you are misunderstanding the suggestion.
> The way quorum usually works in face-to-face meeting is that the
> deliberative body cannot come to a decision without a quorum. If a vote
> is held and then it is discovered that there was not quorum at the time
> of the vote, then the vote is discarded. No option wins, no option is
> In the case that John Robinson mentioned, if the quorum is 72, and 70
> people vote, there is no quorum, so all 70 ballots are discarded and the
> vote is null and void.
> I read his suggestion as extending that to Debian voting procedure. He
> would have quorum measured not on an option-by-option basis, but on a
> total-ballot basis. Too few valid ballots received nullifies the vote.
> If enough valid ballots are received by the deadline, then the vote is
> binding, regardles of the number of people who voted for (or against)
> any particular option.
That's the way I read his suggestion, also. And that's what I was saying
is bad. I don't think you understood my objection.
Here's the problem: a vote against an option can cause quorum to be met
and therefore cause the option to win. This discourages sincere votes
against the option.