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

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 Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>

Reply to: