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

Re: Constitutional amendment: Condorcet/Clone Proof SSD vote tallying



On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 01:13:37PM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Why do you believe it's meaningful to distinguish between "the default
> > option wins" and "the entire vote is thrown out"?  When is status quo
> > != the default option?
> 
> in this case, for the default option to be equal to status quo, the
> default option would have to be ``The current officeholder.''

The "status quo != the default option" is a red herring. For the last DPL
vote, we had:

	Moshe Zadka
	Bdale Garbee
	Branden Robinson
	Martin Michlmayr
	None of the above

In this case, to continue the status quo Bdale would have won, and the
default option (None of the above) winning would have meant "the election
procedure is repeated, many times if necessary".

The default option winning is exactly equivalent to the vote being thrown
out.

> only in the case (as per the proposed A.3.3, which is not affected by
> the amendment) that the default option is not specified, does it revert
> to Further Discssion. 

Further discussion is what you get when the issue doesn't manage to be
decided. "No" is different to "Further discussion".

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

  ``Dear Anthony Towns: [...] Congratulations -- 
        you are now certified as a Red Hat Certified Engineer!''

Attachment: pgpP2iJ9RBut0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: