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

Re: Discussions in Debian

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 10:19:04 +0100, Jochen Voss <voss@seehuhn.de> said: 

> Hello Manoj,
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 09:12:52PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> An easier way is to look at the votes when they come out. Anyone
>> who votes further discussion in the top 3 is not interested in
>> compromise or consensus, and has decided "My way or the Highway".
> Sorry, but I think this is not true.  Voting further discussion in
> the top 3 may just indicate that the voter has found out about the
> implicit 1:1 super-majority requirement which we have in our current
> voting system.

> In my opinion the best strategy [*] with our current voting system
> is to rank "further discussion" second, directly after your
> favourite option.

	Best strategy? My way should win, no matter what? I would
 rather have my way win, or else we do nothing? My way alone is worth
 considering? Me? Me! ME!!!!!

	You may win the battle, but you'll lose the war: you have
 just alienated people who do not hink like you. Indeed, this my
 opinion is the only one that counts strategy is the problem: the
 voting system allows you to be a jerk, and allows you to vote in a
 fashion that says you have a closed mind.

> This slightly increases the chances of your favourite option winning
> (the others could be dropped because of the super-majority
> requirement).  And you can still indicate your preferences among the
> remaining options.

	Yep. Being a closed minded jerk decreases the chances of
 reaching a compromise solution. But you are the one choosing to
 decrease the chances of anyone elses solution winning.

> Rewarding insincere voting is the price we pay for introducing the
> quorum and super-majority mechanisms.

	The voting mechanism is nuetral, it allows you to express an
 opinion. Including "My way or the highway".  Deciding to express
 that opinion is your call.  And developers like you are the reason
 why Debian is getting to be an unpleasant place: closed minded
 bigots who think their opinion is the only one that counts, and the
 project could not possibly do anything else, and bring it all down
 to a majority rule showdown.

	I find that disgusting.

The confusion of a staff member is measured by the length of his
memos. New York Times, Jan. 20, 1981
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: