Re: Constitutional amendment: Condorcet/Clone Proof SSD vote tallying
On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 22:42:37 +1000, Hamish Moffatt <hamish@debian.org> said:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 11:53:48AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
>> > > This fails the Monotonicity Criterion (MC)
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 01:10:05AM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>> > Doesn't this depend on (a) the order in which the votes are
>> > received,
>>
>> No.
>>
>> [I'm busy at the moment, but I'll try to answer your other
>> questions later, if no one else has by then.]
> Well, I'm still confused.
> Here is Manoj's example:
>> Consider the case where the quorum is 45, and there have been 44
>> votes -- 23 for, 21 against. (Only one option on the ballot). I am
>> opposed to the option.
>>
>> At this point; under my version; I can express my opinions with no
>> fear of harming my candidate. Under your amendment; if I do not
>> vote; the vote is nullified. However, if I vote against the option
>> -- the option shall win!!
> If there are 45 total votes, quorum is met. 23 votes is more than
> 22. Why shouldn't Manoj's candidate lose? He has less votes.
Votes against do not contribute to Debian's concept pf a Quorum.
> In Manoj's example he talks about there already being 44 votes and
> him adding another, which goes on to make his candidate fail (as
> quorum is now met), instead of the vote being void.
> Does this same argument still apply if the 22 against votes occur,
> followed by 23 for votes? Why should this vote be invalid?
I think you are missing the point. The order does not matter
-- the issue is that a person opposed to the option does not know, in
a low turnout situation, whether voting against an option would
help the option win.
> Or are you arguing that votes against an option cannot count towards
> quorum? In which case, each option would have to meet quorum
> independently to win. That wouldn't be a good definition of quorum.
But that is indeed what we have come up with. Quorum, and
majorities, are a per option thing; allowing us to consider several
solution, with differing majority and participation requirements, on
the same ballot.
manoj
--
Bershere's Formula for Failure: There are only two kinds of people who
fail: those who listen to nobody... and those who listen to everybody.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: