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

Re: Splitting Aye/Nay from vote tallying (Was: Constitutional amendment: Condorcet/Clone Proof SSD vote tallying)

On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 10:44:09PM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
> so: the need to get seconds (normally, 5) is in no way, shape, or form a
> reflection of the vote tallying method.

That's a non-sensical claim. The current system is exactly equivalent
to having a ballot that consists of any proposal anyone makes ever, eg:

	  ,--------- Do you second? Y/N
	 |    ,---- Ranking
	 |   |
	 V   V
	[ ] [ ] Option A
	[ ] [ ] Option B
	[ ] [ ] Option C
	[ ] [ ] Option D
	--- [ ] Further Discussion

and adding the rule that if less than 5 people mark a "Y" for each option
in the first column, it's removed from consideration. The difference is
in the annoyance when managing the vote, not in the final outcome; which
is to say that whether seconding is a detail of the tallying mechanism
is purely an implementation detail.


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: pgp8XDWu7iC7x.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: