On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 09:57:13PM +1200, Nick Phillips wrote: > On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 07:27:21PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > Here, the vote(s) for B caused A to win. > > Other examples are possible (for example: 19 ABD, 1 BDA). > > > > To make your proposal work right, we'd need a separate quorum > > > > determination phase which is independent of the voting phase. > > > i fail to see that argument. > > See above. > I don't believe that it's acceptable for an otherwise beaten option to > win due the the otherwise winning option being discarded due to a quorum > requirement, as John suggests might happen. > I also don't believe that it's acceptable to break the Monotonicity Criterion. > If a winning option would be discarded due to quorum requirements, then > I think the vote should probably be considered void. If the "winning" option is discarded due to quorum requirements, then given that all non-default options have the *same* quorum requirement, this is exactly what would happen. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
pgpnLhWGEbGIp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
