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

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


Guido Trotter wrote:
> If we are sure that if 2*quorum people cast a vote there is no problem with
> the proposed system, why not add to the current proposal the fact that the
> votes cast, altogether, have to be at least 2*quorum? This will also ensure
> that, before taking a vote into consideration, there is enough general
> intrest about the issue...

The problems start when there is not enough general interest but something 
should be done regardless.

For example, let's say we have a technical problem which affects many 
packages, and the alternatives are
C- do nothing
D- further discussion (i.e. the default option)
B- implement a workaround
A- fix the problem "correctly", which affects a lot of programs, is a policy 
change, whatever

then the last option should have a quota attached. So there may well be a 
nicely unambiguous A-B-D-C vote, but if not enough people care, solution A 
isn't going to be implemented anyways, so B clearly is the right thing to do.

Matthias Urlichs   |   {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de   |  smurf@smurf.noris.de
Disclaimer: The quote was selected randomly. Really. | http://smurf.noris.de
"You've got to have a gimmick if your band sucks."
		-- Gary Giddens

Reply to: