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

Re: The "Free" vs. "Non-Free" issue



On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 02:57:02PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > > That's where we address things like "what's the point"?

> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 01:35:34PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > However, the discussion period is intended to be finite, it's not
> > supposed to be used as a filibuster.

> I never suggested that it was.

> And, in fact, it's the Secretary who gets to say when the
> discussion period is over, precisely because it might
> involve a judgment call.

> > If his answer to "what's the point?" is nothing more involved than
> > "because I want it to be known where the developership stands on the
> > question I proposed", and he gets the requisite seconds, isn't it
> > better to call the vote rather than discussing interminably?

> Who cares?  Why do you ask?  How does this question have
> any relevance?

Because I see the same arguments as always being trotted out and filling
my mailbox; and I'm loathe to unsubscribe from debian-vote, but don't
see that most of these discussions really do anything to advance
understanding of the proposal actually on the table.  If this proposal
really doesn't compel us to *do* anything and amounts only to a
referendum on the question, it gives us insight into the views of the
developership and tells us whether more debate is really needed (and
from which side).

> > Particularly when voting on a resolution which appears to be toothless
> > by design?

> NO!

> That's the really bad part of Andrew's proposal.

> While our voting system is fairly resilient to insincere voting, no
> voting system can be completely immune -- for example, consider what
> happens when a majority of the votes are insincere.  And, if the ballot
> options themselves are insincere, that encourages insincere voting.

Sorry, "insincere ballot options" doesn't parse.  Insincere voting
refers to the process of strategically ranking options on a ballot in a
way that does not correspond to the voter's true preference.  You must
be using the word "insincere" to mean something completely different
here.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: pgpNKH9XUgAsX.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: