Re: Splitting out Choice #1 from vote_004
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 22:46:02 +0200, Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> said:
> Le mardi 26 septembre 2006 à 14:33 -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
>> > I like the idea, but it eliminates some choices for the
>> > voter. With this setup, it is not possible to prioritize the
>> > firmware removal over the release, while still considering other
>> > options acceptable. How would I be able to express the following:
>>
>> Since the issues are orthogonal, you could vote for "DFSG #2
>> applies to all programmatic works" . There is no conflict between
>> that and releasing etch, with or without special exceptions; so
>> ranking vs that and releases does not seem to make sense.
> This leads to a case of tactical voting. If I prefer my proposal
> over Frederik's, but I'd prefer that none of them would pass, I
> should still put mine before NOTA to give it a better chance to hit
> 3:1.
err, that makes no sens. If you want enither to pass, you vote
them both below FD. You can still vote your above Joss's, and still
below FD, if you wanted to express a preference without wanting
either to pass.
It is trickier to express the preference "I want neither to
pass, but if they do, I want mine to win, despite it needing 3:1
while the other does not"
The best you can do is express you prefer yours to the other,
and FD to both.
> I know I'm nitpicking, but isn't this whole thread about nitpicking?
> ;)
I don't know about you, bit for me this thread is about
getting the right thing done, and getting the general resolutions
resolved.
manoj
--
FEELINGS are cascading over me!!!
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: