On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 11:42:50 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: > > > + If there are fewer than S2 candidates > > > + at the end of the nomination period, then the nomination period is > > > + extended for two further weeks, repeatedly if necessary.</li> > > > + <li>If "None Of The Above" wins the election, or if fewer than S2 > > > + candidates win over "None of the Above", the election process is > > > + repeated.</li> > > How often should the nomination period and the election process be > > repeated? I'd suggest to include some maximum otherwise they could go > > on ad infinitum. > You can see similar rules in other parts of the constitution, see 5.2.4, > 5.2.6.
I think there's a huge difference between "no candidates" (5.2.4) and "fewer than S2 candidates" in your proposal, and between "NOTA wins" (5.2.6) vs. "fewer than S2 candidates over NOTA". In other words: The threshold is much higer (16 vs. 1 AIUI) and it's much easier that it won't be reached. And the regulations in the Constitution seem logically necessary: If there is not a single candidate or a single winner there has to be some "else case" whereas your S2 boundary is arbritary (which is not bad in itself but it could be any other value too). > Do you think it's likely for it to go on for more than one repetition? I've no real idea but it might lead to a dead end. And having infinite nominations/elections because there are e.g. "only" 10 and not 16 persons seems to defeat the whole idea. Cheers, gregor -- .''`. http://info.comodo.priv.at/ | gpg key ID: 0x00F3CFE4 : :' : debian: the universal operating system - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' member of https://www.vibe.at/ | how to reply: http://got.to/quote/ `- NP: Bob Dylan: Absolutely sweet Marie
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
