There is what I consider an unnecessary problem with later-no-harm [1] in
Debian's use of the Condorcet voting method in the Debian Constitution
§A.6.3 [2].
The problem was visible in the recent CTTE init system vote, as noted by fx
Steve Langasek [3]. Given options
* systemd (D)
* upstart (U)
* F
On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 01:18:21PM +0100, Thue Janus Kristensen wrote:
> There is what I consider an unnecessary problem with later-no-harm [1] in
> Debian's use of the Condorcet voting method in the Debian Constitution
> §A.6.3 [2].
This also reminded me of
https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2
Hallo,
the Condorcet criterion and the later-no-harm criterion
are incompatible. Therefore, the fact that Debian's Condorcet
method violates the later-no-harm criterion doesn't come
from the order of its checks.
Markus Schulze
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
wi
Hi,
Markus Schulze:
> the Condorcet criterion and the later-no-harm criterion
> are incompatible. Therefore, the fact that Debian's Condorcet
> method violates the later-no-harm criterion doesn't come
> from the order of its checks.
>
That may be so, but our method of removing choices that fail t
4 matches
Mail list logo