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

Re: supermajority options

On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 12:59:07AM -0600, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> If Vote #1 loses, the game might be repeated ad nauseum until it
> passes.  But at least the risk of lurching back and forth is reduced
> substantially, and this requires proponents to maintain a long-term
> interest in passage.  It also encourages proponents to compromise with
> opponents (thus encouraging consensus), as gathering a 2:1 margin is
> relatively hard.

I think we could have this benefit even without a supermajority
requirement, because our voting system is more sophisticated than
the yes/no model you're using.  Suppose an option wins with only 51:49
support.  Just like in your scenario, the losers are pissed and
organize a new vote.  However, both camps are now aware of how close
the margin is, so it's likely that several compromise options will
be added to the ballot, and those are likely to win with a larger

Richard Braakman

Reply to: