Hi,
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 2:40 PM Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
>
> I don't understand how you semantically see 7 and 8 as comparable.
Aside from Bdale's reason for ranking unwanted options below FD—which
were motivated by the voting system—I do: GRs do not decide a matter
with prejudice, even
Le lundi 19 avril 2021 à 12:46:38-0700, Russ Allbery a écrit :
> "Barak A. Pearlmutter" writes:
>
> > Sam, you make an excellent point about gaps between options, and that
> > a ranking does not show the strength of preferences. Like, I might
> > prefer ALPHA >>> BETA > GAMMA while you prefer
Le dimanche 18 avril 2021 à 22:18:22+0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter a écrit :
> The Schwartz set resolution algorithm is absolutely best of breed. But
> there's an old saying in computer science: garbage in, garbage out.
>
> If we look at the actual ballots, it's really interesting. Options 7
> and 8
"Barak A. Pearlmutter" writes:
> Sam, you make an excellent point about gaps between options, and that
> a ranking does not show the strength of preferences. Like, I might
> prefer ALPHA >>> BETA > GAMMA while you prefer ALPHA > BETA >>> GAMMA.
> So if it's down to ALPHA vs BETA, my vote should
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 05:32:40PM +0100, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
> Sam Hartman writes:
> > For me though, even there, notice that we'd be choosing between options
> > that the voters considered acceptable.
> > Because of that, I am not bothered by the cycle.
>
> If the decision doesn't
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 at 16:35, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I think we need voting reform around how the amendment process works and
> managing discussion time ...
> ...
> Preferences can be of different strengths.
>
> Which is to say that the gaps between preferences might be relatively
> weak.
FWIW, I didn't consider 7 and 8 at all similar.
After watching the strain the pre-vote discussion introduced, I decided making
no statement as a project was the best outcome. But if the project were to
make a statement, I wanted to express preference between the acceptable to me
statements,
Sam Hartman writes:
> For me though, even there, notice that we'd be choosing between options
> that the voters considered acceptable.
> Because of that, I am not bothered by the cycle.
If the decision doesn't really matter but a non-FD option must be
chosen (like a hungry group picking a
> "Barak" == Barak A Pearlmutter writes:
Barak> The Schwartz set resolution algorithm is absolutely best of
Barak> breed. But there's an old saying in computer science: garbage
Barak> in, garbage out.
Barak> If we look at the actual ballots, it's really
Barak>
I'm writing to present an alternate interpretation--the one under which
I think our voting system is doing a good job of choosing among complex
ballots in the last couple elections.
I think we need voting reform around how the amendment process works and
managing discussion time, but I am very
Quoting Don Armstrong (2021-04-19 00:39:12)
> On Sun, 18 Apr 2021, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
> > If we look at the actual ballots, it's really interesting. Options 7
> > and 8 were semantically pretty much equivalent. It's hard to see any
> > reason for someone to rank them very differently.
>
On 2021/04/18 23:36, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> Complaining about the
> voting system because you don't like the outcome or because you could
> announce the outcome in an awkward way is not helpful.
Who complained about the voting system because they didn't like the
outcome of this particular vote?
12 matches
Mail list logo
