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

Re: supermajority options

On Sat, Nov 23, 2002 at 12:48:05AM -0600, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> On Nov 19, Raul Miller wrote:
> > Here's some thoughts about how we might implement supermajority:
> > 
> > [1] The simplest: discard supermajority entirely.  Nothing special is
> > required to override "important decisions".  This has some elegantly
> > simple mathematical properties but I don't know of any other argument
> > for it.
> Simple, perhaps, but I'm not willing to risk the project on the
> assumption that this would have no negative effects.  Supermajority
> has the nice property that avoids the recurrent flip-flop problem in a
> close voting decision (where Group A wins, then Group B wins, then
> Group A wins again, ad nauseum).

How do we know this would happen at all, let alone "ad nauseum"?

G. Branden Robinson                |     You could wire up a dead rat to a
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     DIMM socket and the PC BIOS memory
branden@debian.org                 |     test would pass it just fine.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |     -- Ethan Benson

Attachment: pgp4LddpLuOoR.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: