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

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

>>>>> "John" == John H Robinson, IV <jaqque@debian.org> writes:

    John> we have two examples of where per-option quorum is flawed:

    John> Example 1:

    John> 2 options + default, R=15. 15 voters. 10 vote ABD, 5 vote
    John> BDA

    John> result: Condorcet would select option A Proposed would
    John> select option B (B != IDW) Amended would select option A

Aj has made what seems to me to be a compelling argument that

1) local quorum is not flawed in this case

2) The Debian community wants B to win votes of this form.

What we are saying is that we are giving minorities the power in
certain limited cases to overrule the majority and force us to select
an second acceptable option in preference to an acceptable option more
preferred by the majority.  I.E.  when options are fairly close, a
minority finding a particular option unacceptable can change the
outcome of the election.

The majority accepts this possibility by ranking B as acceptable--by
ranking it above the default option.

Reply to: