Re: Call for votes for the Condorcet/Clone proot SSD voting methodsGR
On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 07:03:52PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> For some reason, some people think that quorum should be assessed after
> the vote and should be used to toss the vote if not enough votes were
> received. That has bad properties which can discourage some voters when
> participation is already low. Interestingly enough, most of the people
> who have been "confused" by the concept of quorum have been advocating
> this approach.
>
> In essence, the issues we're trying to address, with quorum, are different
> from the "Everybody meets in the big hall and votes, and if not enough
> people show up we can't vote" concept of classic quorum. If people are
> confused by the fact that we're voting on a mailing list (rather than
> in person), that's sad but it's not a reason to use an inferior mechanism.
What's wrong with "classic quorum" though? Why is your method superior?
hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>
Reply to: