On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 04:49:08PM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > Hello, > > On 31 August 2015 at 08:06, Kurt Roeckx - Debian Project Secretary > <secret...@debian.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > A new GR has been started to update the Standard Resolution > > Procedure. Details about it can be found on: > > https://www.debian.org/vote/2015/vote_002 > > > > I'm failing to understand the current situation, nor proposed changes. > Can someone please give a plain English explanation and/or examples? > > E.g. committee of size N is voting on an issue I which happens to be > overriding developer. The votes are F for, A against, S abstentions. > Previously this would fail, now this will pass.
One of the problems, and I consider that to be the most important one, is about the stratigic vote that you can do. For example, condiser that there are 2 options (A and B) plus the default option All options are acceptable for everybody, but 75% prefer A and 25% prefer B. You would except the following vote: 75%: 123 25%: 213 Option A would win as expected. If there is a 3:1 majority requirement, you could instead vote: 75%: 123 25%: 312 As in, the 2nd group says that option A is not acceptable while in fact it was. This results in the option A being dropped because it does not reach majority. 75% say A acceptable and 25% say it's not resulting in a 3:1 majority saying it's acceptable. The 75% just don't reach the "strictly greater" than the 3:1 majority requirement. In the end option B wins because of stratigic voting, while if they were honest option A would have won. The solution to this problem is moving the majority check later in the process, so that option B would have been dropped first. If they did this stratigic voting in that case both options would have been dropped. Kurt
