Re: Results for Voting secrecy
On 2022-03-28 01:22, Christian Kastner wrote:
>
> On 2022-03-27 19:31, felix.lechner@lease-up.com wrote:
>> Would you please explain why Option 2 defeated NOTA by 124 votes but at
>> the same time defeated Option 3, which was identical to NOTA, by only 35
>> votes?
>
> This seems to be inline with what the proposer intended, though. From
> the text of Choice 3:
>
>> [...] which is also why I explicitly want to see "keep the status
>> quo" on the ballot, and not only as "NOTA", but as a real option.
Having thought about this some more, I think the suggestion that the
options are identical is quite simply incorrect.
Somebody inclined towards voting secrecy but unhappy with either of the
two proposed solutions of this particular GR might have voted 4123,
leaving room future GRs with alternative voting secrecy proposals.
Somebody unconditionally opposed towards voting secrecy would have
reaffirmed the status quo with 3412, indicating that any future voting
secrecy proposals would also be rejected.
The latter explicitly reaffirms the status quo, the former does not. I
guess this is why Holger proposed Choice 3.
Reply to: