Re: Dec 15 voting amendment draft
On Sun, Dec 15, 2002 at 02:46:47PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > Under 4.2 Procedure [for developers during a general resolution or
> > election], change item 3 to read:
> > 3. Votes are taken by the Project Secretary. Votes and tallies results
> > are not revealed during the voting period; after the vote the
> > Project Secretary lists all the votes cast.
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 05:30:18PM -0500, Thomas Smith wrote:
> Maybe we should say that the Secretary lists the votes in a way that
> does not reveal both a voter's name and vote to anyone other than the
> voter.
That doesn't apply to general resolutions, and I think that's
adequately covered elsewhere.
> > Under A.2 Calling for a vote, change item 2 to read
> >
> > 2. The proposer or a sponsor of a motion may call for a vote on a
> > set of related amendments.
> This is a problem because the previous item states that the
> proposer/sponsor may call for a vote but it is never stated what that
> person can call for a vote on. Also, this draft of item 2 does not let
> the proposer of a motion call for a vote on that motion.
Hmm... I'll need to rethink this. Not today, though, I've been up
all night and I'd probably overlook too many things.
> > Replace A.3 with:
> >
> > A.3. Voting procedure
> >
> > 1. Each independent set of related amendments is voted on in a
> > separate ballot. Each such ballot has as options all the sensible
> > combinations of amendments and options from that set, and a default
> > option. If the default option wins then the entire resolution
> > procedure is set back to the start of the discussion period.
> This wording says nothing about motions. Should it? Perhaps earlier
> mentions of "amendments" should be changed to "motions to amend" and
> this section should be changed to talk about motions.
Probably -- I (or maybe someone else) needs to go through the constitution
and look at all the words used to describe ballot options and make sure
that the end result is coherent.
> > 3. Any option which does not defeat the default option by its
> > required majority ratio is dropped from consideration.
> > a. An option A defeats an option B if N(A,B)*V(A,B) is larger
> > than N(B,A)*V(B,A) and if the (A,B) defeat has not been
> > dropped.
> I have a comprehensible name for N(A,B)*V(A,B): "scaled number of votes
> preferring A to B". So the subitem could begin "An option A defeats an
> option B if the scaled number of votes preferring A to B N(A,B)*V(A,B)
> is larger..."
I think I can use that, thanks.
--
Raul
Reply to: