Anthony Towns wrote: > > For reference, "back to the Condorcet standard" is not what we > want here. The default option allows allows us to combine condorcet > preferential voting, with an approval-vote style calculation of majorities > or acceptability.
the proposal uses Condorcet as a standard, and tries to add Quota and Supermajority options in a way that does not break Condorcet. the way that Quota is handled does break Condorcet, by allowing a winner that is not the Ideal Democratic Winner. my amendment fixes that issue. my amendment does not address the issue of Supermajority. > > while ensuring that a few developers (less that R) cannot make > > any ``stealth decisions''. > > Likewise, the quorum requirement is made on a per-option basis > specifically to ensure that there's no bias in the system -- that is, > there's no incentive not to vote for an option you like, because that > would in any way make it more likely for an option you dislike to win. it inherently biases the default option. my amendment removes that bias. may i assume that you beleive all voters support the default option in all cases? > For reference, my only quibbles with the draft are in the wording of: Manoj addressed these sufficiently in Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -john