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

Re: Supermajority requirements and historical context [Was, Re: First call for votes for the Lenny release GR]

----- "Steve Langasek" <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:

> It isn't.  The US two-party system and resulting political maneuvering are
> an exploit of FPTP.

The point of the super majority was to "engrave the social contract in stone". From the beginning, there was a concern that financial incentives would distort the shape of the organization and we wanted a safeguard against the system being gamed by a commercial organization "buying up" the voting populace. (Microsoft being the primary suspect in that day)

Requiring significant inertia to make fundamental changes to the original plan is not a crazy idea.

Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
ean@brainfood.com - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315

Reply to: