On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 03:42:28PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 12:57:58PM -0600, Hubert Chan wrote: > > On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 15:25:49 -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > > N.B., I would object to having any ballot options on the same GR that > > > consist of this same draft with point #4 stricken, because assuming > > > rational voters I would expect the voters who approve of that option > > > to be a strict superset of those who approve of my proposal, and I > > > would call on the Project Secretary to exercise his authority to keep > > > these two proposals on separate ballots to avoid prejudicing the > > > outcome in favor of a "watered down" option. > > Maybe I don't quite understand your concern correctly, but isn't this > > one of the advantages of using Condorcet? i.e. if we had points [1-3] > > on the same ballot as points [1-4], even though the number of votes for > > [1-3] compared to NOTA would obviously be higher than the number of > > votes for [1-4] compared to NOTA, the thing that would determine whether > > [1-3] wins, or [1-4], would be the ranking between those two options > > (assuming both win compared to NOTA). So those who agree with point 4 > > should rank [1-4] higher than [1-3] (and those who don't would obviously > > rank it lower). Hence if more people agree with #4 than disagree with > > it, then [1-4] should win over [1-3]. > http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2003/10/msg00168.html Sorry, let's get a more refined reference here; the thread following from that particular post is long and scary, and mostly irrelevant to this discussion. http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2003/11/msg00051.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2003/11/msg00066.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2003/11/msg00074.html -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
