On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 09:15:09AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote: > On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 07:03:29AM -0800, Robert Woodcock wrote: > > Err, if there are three choices (your proposal, editorial-only, and further > > discussion), and the Condorcet ballots show that more people preferred > > editorial-only over your proposal, doesn't that mean that more people > > preferred editorial-only over your proposal? > The problem is that it may also be the case that more people preferred > Branden's proposal over doing nothing at all, in which case it would be > inappropriately defeated. No, it wouldn't. If the options are: Branden's Proposal Editorial changes only No changes and people prefer: Editorial defeats No by 300:20 Editorial defeats Branden's by 170:150 Branden's defeats No by 170:150 then there's nothing inappropriate about Editorial changes only being what happens -- the majority of developers think that's the right thing to do. (Example votes for the above outcome: [321] x20 [213] x20 [312] x130 [123] x150 ) We've already been over this. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. Australian DMCA (the Digital Agenda Amendments) Under Review! -- http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/copyright/digitalagenda
Attachment:
pgpbXA7zTjhmu.pgp
Description: PGP signature