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

Re: supermajority options

>>"John" == John H Robinson, IV <jhriv@ucsd.edu> writes:

 John> http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:4wJT-1c0FykC:www.democ.uci.edu/democ/papers/McGann02.pdf+condorcet+supermajority&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

	Interesting. However, that paper makes a number of assumptions

   May (1952) shows that majority rule is the only positively
   responsive voting rule that satisfies anonymity (all voters are
   treated equally) and neutrality (all alternatives are treated
   equally).  If we use a system other than majority rule, then we
   lose either anonymity or neutrality.

	Eh? this obviously does not apply. Additionally, the core of
 the argument is about bargaining powers, which apply to places like
 traditionally elected bodies (parliaments, etc), where people whose
 votes can't be bargained for to reach super majority lose out. This
 is by no means relevant to Debian's voting process.  Additionally,
 the minorities are hurt position presupposes the minorities are the
 minorites in the US population, and the status quo is bad for them;
 this is arguably not relevant in the case of debian.

	Secondly, it says that supermajorities are biased with
 reference to the status quo -- which is, indeed, desired: we do 
 put supermajority requirements only on documents and decisions where
 the status quo was arrived after a great deal of delibration, and has
 been adopted by the full membership, and indeed, forms the core of
 the project. The status Quo, in the case of the DFSG+SC, defines what
 our philosophies are, and they tread a fine line between extreme
 positions on either side. Being biased towards what has lead to the
 creation of a fine OS, and seems to have caused little (in my
 opinion) in the way of a crisis, seems to be a fine thing.

	The paper has failed to consvince me. It also deals with
 concepts of economic efficiency, and whether filibusters in the US
 senate have been used to oppose civil liberty laws, and thus do not
 protect minorities. 

 Somewhat alarmed at the continued growth of the number of employees
 on the Department of Agriculture payroll in 1962, Michigan Republican
 Robert Griffin proposed an amendment to the farm bill so that "the
 total number of employees in the Department of Agriculture at no time
 exceeds the number of farmers in America." Bill Adler, "The
 Washington Wits"
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: