Neil McGovern writes ("Re: Debian's custom use of Condorcet and later-no-harm"): > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 04:50:47PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > > In my proposal, the casting voter gets to choose between A and B and > > there less incentive to manipulate the system by voting FD. > > I'm just wondering, what was the purpose behind treating FD as a special > case in the first place? Could it simply not be an option on all > ballots, but treated exactly the same as all other candidates?
When I originally wrote it, simply to deal with supermajorities. I'm coming round to the view that the right answer is for a winning option which didn't pass supermajority to simply decay into a non-binding statement of opinion (at least as regards the parts of it which require the supermajority). Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/21264.50317.900194.208...@chiark.greenend.org.uk