Re: Re: What does FD Mean
On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 09:45:15AM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
>
> Let's say a cohort of voters prefers option APRICOT to option BANANA,
> but would like neither (FD) even better. However they are well aware
> that there's no way FD will win.
>
> It is possible that if they vote their true preference,
>
> FD > APRICOT > BANANA
>
> then BANANA will win, while if they vote
>
> APRICOT > FD > BANANA
>
> then APRICOT will win, due to majority/quorum issues. In other words,
> they are penalized for voting honestly.
It's true that our system isn't perfect, and that if you know how
others will vote you can manipulate the outcome. You can try to
influence which options get dropped or not due to quorum or more
likely majority requirements.
I think in your scenario, I assume APRICOT was dropped due to the
quorum or majority requirements and changing their vote to mark
APRICOT as acceptable means it was considered and can now have
more people that prefer it over BANANA.
It can also be abused the other way around. People who
prefer:
BANANA > APRICOT > FD
might vote:
BANANA > FD > APRICOT
in an attempt to drop APRICOT as an option, for instance
because they know there are a lot of people who're going
to vote FD > APRICOT > BANANA.
I don't believe this is actually a problem in Debian for
general resolutions and elections. I don't think we know
enough details about what others will vote or have group
coordination to abuse it.
A possible solution is to drop the majority requirement
and have a quorum on the number of people that vote, and this
would work for most votes, except those where we now have
a supermajority requirement.
Kurt
Reply to: