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

Re: Norman Petry and I (Ossipoff) recommended CSSD, but Schwartz Woodall is a better voting system for Debian

Just to clarify what I meant for my suggestion, my
chicken-dilemma-free suggestion would be this:

Do a rank-balloting among all of the options, with D as one of the options..

Do a Schwartz Woodall count.among all the options.

If D wins, or if the winner loses pairwise to D, or if the wnner
doesn't beat D by the required supermajority ratio, or if number of
voters doesn't meet the global voting quorum, then have further
discussion, and later vote again.

Otherwise, declare the winner as the chosen option.

Just one more thing:

One reason why I've been advocating Schwartz Woodal (along with
Woodall and Benham) is because, in official public government
elections, the chicken dilemma _would_ be a problem, or at least a
serious nuisance that would demand special strategy, and would take
away the freedom from strategy-need that Condorcet methods could
ideally have.

Ii consider official public government elections to be where we
seriously need a better voting system. I believe that it would make
all the difference.

I realize that Debian is an international organization, and this this
forum is for duscussing Debian voting matters, and so what follows in
this post is off-topic. But I just want to explain why I consider it
important to advocate better voting systems.

The Green Party U.S. (GPUS) offers Instant Runoff (IRV) in its
platform. I know that Debian is an international organization, but of
course my main goal has been reforms in the U,.S.  It seems to me that
any reform in the U.S. must start with the election of Greens to

IRV, like Woodall, Benham, and Schwartz Woodall, meets the Mutual
Majority Criterion, and has no chicken dilemma. But of course IRV
fails the Condorcet Criterion. IRV's failure to always elect the
Condorcet winner compromise makes IRV too uncompromising and inimical
for amicable organizations. It also makes IRV vulnerable to
replacement by a dis-satisfied majority, when IRV is used in official
public government elections.

So, I feel that, if the GPUS were elected here, and IRV were
established as the voting system, there might soon be majority wishes
to replace IRV with a Condorcet-complying voting system. A good
Condorcet-complying replacement would be Benham, Woodall, or Schwartz

That gives me incentive to advocate Schwartz Woodall for
organizations, because it's the kind of voting system that would
likely be eventually adopted in a Green U.S.  So I'm just telling my
motivation to advocate Schwartz Woodall, even to organizations that
don't really have a chicken dilemma.

Of course (at least if there's a chicken dilemma), Schwartz Woodall's
combination of the Mutual Majority Criterion, no chicken dilemma, and
the Condorcet Criterion would make it the a good choice (the best
choice, I claim) for organizational voting.

Of course obviously, if Debian doesn't have a chicken dilemma, there's
no need for Debian to change its voting system from CSSD to Schwartz

Michael Ossipoff

Reply to: