On Sat, 14 Oct 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> I dislike this extra option, and in particular that it only
> requires a majority to apply. I'd really prefer splitting
> this out to separate proposals so that AI=3 applies to both of
> them separately, or at lesat requiring 3 times as many OPTION A
> votes as non-OPTION A votes. Also, this doesn't take into account
> PRESENT; is that intentional?
The point is that if we're fairly closely split, we won't get an
AI-3 majority for *either* option, then we'd be stuck in the unclear
situation we are now. (which, no matter how sophisticated the CFJ
logic is, with opinion fairly split we're not going to have enough
consensus for a CFJ to settle it).
