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

Re: Discussion: Possible GR: Enhance requirements for General Resolutions

On Sun, 04 Jan 2009, Chris Waters wrote:
> Because not wanting any of the options, but still having (strong)
> opinions on which are more and which are less desirable is still a
> valid position--one I find myself in frequently IRL.

It's fine to rank options you prefer further discussion to, because
that's a valid preference. It expresses: "I'd rather die a painless
death now than die a painful death now, but I'd rather have further
discussion than either of those options." That doesn't mean that you
should second either of those options to get them to appear on the
ballot. You don't want either of them to happen, so the ideal ballot
has neither, and if enough supporters of either want them to happen,
they'll second those options themselves.

> if I actually would prefer further discussion, but am still willing
> to compromise and have opinions about which of the options I don't
> like are better than others, what should I do?

Express your opinion on them when voting, but don't second them. If a
majority doesn't prefer them to further discussion, those options will
be discarded due to majority; having options that a majority doesn't
prefer to further discussion on a ballot is a waste of time. An even
more painful waste of time is options which not even 1.5Q people
prefer to further discussion, because those options had no chance at
all of being selected.

If they actually represent options that will pass the FD majority
hurdle, people who actually prefer those options to FD will second
them, and will easily be able to meet K, and should be able to meet Q
or 2Q.

Don Armstrong

Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle
is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to
 -- Richard Feynman "What is and What Should be the Role of Scientific
    Culture in Modern Society"; 1964

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

Reply to: