Hi Russ, Le Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 08:22:47AM -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit : > > Some of the objections that I've seen after recent GRs to complex ballots > are actually objections to relying on the clone-proof nature of the voting > system, or arguments that because of human psychology it's not really > clone-proof because people get confused. I admit to being somewhat > dubious of those arguments (they're often based on the supposed > unreasonableness of voting patterns that I find entirely reasonable and > rational), but, more to the point for this proposal, I think I'm going to > plead "out of scope" for the changes that I'm trying to make. I don't > think this alteration of the process will make the problem of having too > many ballot options any worse (and hopefully the above is a convincing > argument for why I feel that way), and I'd rather leave trying to make it > better as a subject for another GR.
Thank you for your convincing explanation. Maybe sometimes the most confusing part is not the ballot itself, but contradicting opinions expressed on the debian-vote mailing list and elsewhere about what would be the consequences of ranking option X over option Y… Also, in the meantime I remembered of the 2014 GR where I proposed to add the "No GR is needed" option to the ballot, that ended up being the winning option. This is an example of "more is better" that I did not consider when writing my previous email. One last question: in some complex GRs there were discussions about problems caused by mixing 1:1 and 3:1 majority options, which frankly speaking I could not undertand because I never studied our Condorcet method in details. Do you think that such mixes can be problemating and does your proposal address that ? Have a nice day, Charles -- Charles Plessy Nagahama, Yomitan, Okinawa, Japan Debian Med packaging team http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med Tooting from work, https://mastodon.technology/@charles_plessy Tooting from home, https://framapiaf.org/@charles_plessy
