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

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

On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 10:25:38PM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
> Raul Miller wrote:
> > What Anthony is trying to point out, and what you're pretending to
> > ignore, is that what "D wins" means is "no one wins, and the vote
> > is thrown out".
> no, this is not the same. one is a legitimate, binding vote with a real
> bona fide winner. the other is a nullification.

No, it's not. "None of the above" is not a winner -- it's "run the vote
again". "Further discussion" is also not a winner -- it's "work out some
other alternative, or be more persuasive, and try again".

> easily: DPL elections. a thrown out and rescheduled DPL election is a
> lot different from None of the Above winning. 
>     Debian Constitution (proposed) Section 5.2.7.

How about 5.2.6?

    6. The options on the ballot will be those candidates who have
       nominated themselves and have not yet withdrawn, plus None Of The
       Above. If None Of The Above wins the election then the election
       procedure is repeated, many times if necessary.

> -john, who is supposed to be _enjoying_ this weekend.

No one's holding a gun to your head.


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: pgpCq6RcqPBEu.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: