Re: Supermajority requirements and historical context [Was, Re: First call for votes for the Lenny release GR]
----- "Steve Langasek" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Yes, I agree that supermajority requirements are a bad idea in
To understand the need for a supermajority all you have to do is look at American politics. A supermajority insures that a razor thin majority can't end up doing something radically disagreeable to almost half the population. With a three to one supermajority you insure that only a true minority of the project would be in disagreement with whatever action is under consideration.
I do agree that we need clarification around votes where choices have varying consensus requirements. It seems like they may malfunction but I can't really visualize all the ways that might happen. Is there a mathematician in the house?
Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
email@example.com - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315