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

Re: On the firmwares/Lenny vote



On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 11:40:56AM +0000, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Julien Blache <http://blog.technologeek.org/2008/12/14/149>:
> 
> > [...] do not vote by ranking all options 1 to 7 [...] With that many
> > options, the votes will end up diluted and who knows what the result
> > will be.
> > 
> > [And then he suggests a 3111112 vote for those who'd agree to it.]
> 
> Is this really true? I thought our vote methods were robust against
> stuff like that.

The problem is, such a strategy works iff everyone votes the same, IOW
you eliminate a bunch of options (the one you put the rank '3') and
basically let the choice open for the other to the one _other_ people
will prefer.

IOW, that's a "I don't care for options 2 to 6 but I really don't want
1" vote.

And that's especially why this vote is horribly broken, we can't vote
for _many_ options at the same time, eventually only one is chosen,
unless all the options you want to see win have been ranked equally on
every single ballot out there.

For example, if half of the people vote for option2 and option4 as '1'
and other options below, and the other half of voters for option3 and
option4 (and everything else below), then option4 passes over option2
and option3. Yay.

Our secretary is failing his job. Critically.


Note: I'm not saying Julien advocated _this_ vote, I'm explaining what
      it would mean.
-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

Attachment: pgp7glrGoyH0A.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: